
aassJti y7(3f r 

Book. > f ^ 

Gop)'iightl^ 



^_Jjj^ 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 



A HISTORY OF 

THE FRIENDS 
IN AMERICA 



BY 

ALLEN C. THOMAS, A.M. 

AND 

RICHARD HENRY THOMAS, M.D. 

FOURTH EDITION 

THOROUGHLY REVISED AND ENLARGED 
BY 

ALLEN C. THOMAS, A.M. 



PHILADELPHIA 

THE JOHN C. WINSTON CO. 

190S 



-^^l 



LIBRARY of CONGRESS 
Two Copies Received 

DEC 20 1905 

GoDyfi^ht entry 

CLASS CK XXc. No. 

COPY B. 






Copyright 1894 
By The Christian Literature Company, 



Revised Edition, 

Copyright 1905 

By The John C. Winston Company. 



PREFACE TO FOURTH EDITION. 



The fact that the present edition has been 
printed from new type has afforded the oppor- 
tunity to make many changes in the text, almost 
all of which, however, have been in the line of 
greater clearness and precision. All errors of 
whatever kind, have, so far as known, been cor- 
rected, and a number of unintentional omissions 
have been remedied. The narrative has been 
brought up to date, and in every respect great 
pains have been taken to make the book still 
more worthy of the favor with which previous 
editions have been received. In this revision it 
has not been thought advisable to depart from 
the original plan of the work— that of presenting 
a short history, which, while giving what is essen- 
tial to a clear understanding of the subject, makes 
no pretence of being exhaustive. 

It has been a source of great satisfaction to the 
authors, that, while their work has been criticised 
in matters of secondary importance, its spirit 
and the care with which it has been written have 
been recognized by Friends in general, as well as 
by the representative Journals of Quakerism — 
"The American Friend " (Orthodox), "The 

5 



6 Preface to Fourth Edition, 

Friends* Intelligencer '' (" Hicksite "), " The 
Friend," Philadelphia, (Conservative), and ** The 
Friend,*' London, (the representative of Enghsh 
Friends). 

For the changes and additions in the present 
edition the writer of this Preface is wholly re- 
sponsible, though he has had the benefit of a few 
notes made from time to time by his brother. It 
is impossible to estimate the loss which this edition 
has sustained from being deprived of the late Dr. 
Thomas's wide knowledge of existing conditions 
in the Society of Friends, a knowledge which was 
probably unsurpassed, combined as it was with 
an almost passionate devotion to the Society and 
its doctrines. 

The difficulty of securing definite and accurate 
accounts of the events of the past few years has 
been great, and indulgence is asked for unavoid- 
able errors and omissions. To the many friends 
who have kindly aided the writer in his work he 

extends grateful thanks. 

Allen C. Thomas. 

Haverford, Pennsylvania, 
Ninth month, 25, 1905. 

Note. It has been with continued feelings of regret that it 
has seemed to be unavoidable to use the titles employed by the 
United States Census of 1890 to distinguish the different branches 
of those calling themselves Friends. To adopt the words of the 
fair-minded critic in " Friends' Intelligencer," this has been sub- 
mitted to, " reluctantly, . . for the reason that some distinguish- 
ing names are evidently necessary, especially outside the Society, 
and that so far nothing better has been proposed." Strictly 
speaking, the names are unfair and inaccurate. 



PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. 



The following sketch of the history and doc- 
trines of the Society of Friends in America is 
based on an independent examination of original 
records, documents, contemporary histories, jour- 
nals, and other materials. To compress the his- 
tory of two hundred and fifty years into less than 
one hundred and fifty pages has been no easy 
task ; ^ and while great care has been taken to 
omit nothing of supreme importance, it is alto- 
gether likely that omissions will be found more 
or less serious. It is believed, however, that the 
account fairly represents the main lines of a 
remarkably eventful history. 

In describing the various divisions which have 
occurred in the Society the aim has been to be 
impartial and, so far as practicable, let each side 
speak for itself. If any feel themselves not fully 
represented, indulgence is craved for uninten- 
tional shortcoming. 

To those who have so kindly rendered aid in 
furnishing information and materials for use in 
the preparation of this sketch a grateful acknowl- 
edgment is due. 
Haverford, Pa., 

Fourth month, 1894. 

Note i. This History first appeared as part of volume XII., 
American Church History Series, Christian Literature Co., New 
York, 1894. 

7 



CONTENTS. 



Introduction : Organization. — Yearly Meetings. 
— Organization. — Discipline. — '* The Constitution 
and Discipline." — ** The Five-Years Meeting." . . ii 

CHAPTER I. — Beginnings in England. — George 
Fox. — Early Missionaries. — Margaret Fell. — Doc- 
trines. — •* The Inner Light," etc. — Women as 
Preachers 27 

CHAPTER II. — Discipline and Doctrine. — John 
Perrot. — Meetings for Discipline. — Declaration of 
Faith, 1693. — The Holy Scriptures. — Sufferings of 
Friends 47 

CHAPTER HI.— Early Years in America.— First 
Appearance ia America. — Persecution in Massa- 
chusetts. — The Friends in Rhode Island. — Dispute 
with Roger Williams. — The Friends in New Neth- 
erland. — George Fox on Long Island. — The Friends 
in Virginia. — George Fox in Virginia and Mary- 
land. — The Friends in Maryland. — The Friends 
in New Jersey. — William Penn and New Jersey. 
— P'ounding of Burlington. — The Friends in the 
Carolinas. — William Penn. — The Founding of 
Pennsylvania. — The Keith Schism 61 

CHAPTER IV.— The Eighteenth Century.— 
Loss of Political Power in Pennsylvania. — Growth 
in Numbers. — Enforcement of Discipline. — ** Mid- 
dle Ages of Quakerism." — The Friends and Indians. 
— Friends and Slavery. — Emancipation of Slaves. — 
John Woolman. — Friends and the Revolution. . loi 

CHAPTER V. — Divisions During the Nineteenth 

9 



lo Contents. 

PAGE 

Century. — Hannah Barnard. — Elias Hicks. — Or- 
thodox Party. — Elias Hicks and the Elders. — Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting of 1827. — The Separation 
of 1 827. — The Separations of 1828. — Joseph John 
Gurney.— John Wilbur. — *« Wilburite " Separations. 
—Conferences at Baltimore, 1849, ^^S^f ^^53- — 
The «* Wilburites'\ 119 

CHAPTER VI. — Period of Reorganization. — 
Further Progress. — The *' Hicksites." — Lucretia 
Mott. — Educational Institutions. — Doctrine. — The 
Orthodox. — Declaration of Faith. — Bible Society.— 
Travelling Ministers. — Slavery. — Anti-Slavery Sep- 
aration in Indiana. — Whittier. — The Civil War.— 
Sufferings in North Carolina. — ** Peace Association 
of Friends in America."— President Grant and his 
Indian Policy. — Philanthropic Efforts. — Education 
and Educational Institutions. ... ^ ... 159 

CHAPTER VII. — Later Years of the Nineteenth 
Century. — Causes of Declension. — Reawakening. 
— Change of Front. — Conference of 1887. — *' Dec- 
laration of Faith." — The «* Pastoral System." — 
Conference of 1892. — Foreign Missions 191 

CHAPTER VIII. — Latest Years. — '« American 
Friends Peace Conference." — "Primitive Friends." 
— '* Wilburites." — ** Hicksites." — General Confer- 
ences. — ''Isolated Members." — Reviev^. — Orthodox. 
— Conference of 1897. — Uniform Discipline and 
Union of Yearly Meetings. — Conference of 1902. — 
P^ive-Years Meeting. — Boards of Five-Years Meet- 
ing. — Results. — Foreign Missions. — Summer 
Schools. — Conclusion 207 

APPENDIX.— Statistical Tables.— Bibliogra- 
phy 225 

INDEX 243 



THE FRIENDS IN AMERICA. 



INTRODUCTION. 
ORGANISATION. 

[In the following sketch the titles adopted in the United States 
Census of 1890 are used to distinguish the various divisions of 
the body calling itself by the name of " Friends," as " Orthodox," 
" Hicksites," " Wilburites," and " Primitive." These terms are 
used simply for the sake of distinction, and with no invidious 
meaning.] 

The Friends, in the United States and Canada 
are divided into Yearly Meetings, of which the 
"Orthodox" have fourteen, the ^'Hicksites** 
seven, and the ** Wilburites " seven. As the organi- 
zation is essentially the same in all, they may be 
considered together/ Each Yearly Meeting, as its 
name implies, meets annually, and exercises a juris- 
diction over a certain amount of territory. The 
geographical extent of each varies, but altogether 
they include the whole territory on the continent, 
and all Friends belong to some one of the Yearly 

1 Since 1902 the Orthodox Yearly Meetings, except Philadel- 
phia, Ohio, and Canada have been somewhat more closely as- 
sociated than heretofore, through an organization known a?; The 
Five- Years Meeting, The Constitution of this meeting will be 
considered later. 

II 



12 The Friends. 

Meetings^ with the exception of the small bodies, 
styled ** Primitive/* ^ On all matters relating to 
faith and practice, with the exception of those who 
unite in the Five-Years Meeting (Orthodox), each 
Yearly Meeting is independent of all the rest, nor 
is it amenable to the others, either singly or com- 
bined. On rare occasions one Yearly Meeting 
may ask advice and assistance of others.* In the 
very early days, London Yearly Meeting was re- 
garded in a rather indefinite way as a court of 
appeal, but voluntarily relinquished that position. 
It continues to send, in addition to the special 
" epistles " to each of the Orthodox Yearly Meet- 
ings, one that is known as the " London General 
Epistle," which is read in all the Yearly Meetings, 
but which is simply a message of Christian greet- 
ing. English Friends at times of dissension and 
separation have sometimes endeavored by friendly 
mediation to settle the difificulties. 

1 The Orthodox Yearly Meetings are (1905) : New England, 
New York, Canada, Philadelphia, Baltimore, North Carolina, 
Ohio, Wilmington (O.), Indiana, Western (Ind.), Iowa, Kansas, 
Oregon, California. The Hicksite Yearly Meetings are : New 
York, Genesee (N. Y.), Philadelphia, Baltimore, Ohio, Indiana, 
Illinois. The Wilburite Yearly Meetings are : New England, 
Canada, Ohio, Western (Ind.), Iowa, and Kansas; to these can 
be added (1905) North Carolina, a separation having occurred in 
North Carolina 1904 and the separation having established a 
Yearly Meeting which claims affinity with the Wilburites. 

2 These have one *' General Meeting" (Pennsylvania), etc. ; 
and two "Quarterly Meetings," Scipio (New York), and New 
England. 

* For example, Virginia Yearly Meeting (Orthodox) when it 
had become depleted by emigration consulted Philadelphia, Bal- 
timore, and North Carolina, and on their advice united itself with 
Baltimore Yearly Meeting (Orthodox) in 1845. ^ number of 
other cases of less importance have occurred. 



Introduction. 13 

The Yearly Meetings belonging to each branch 
are not isolated from one another, but are united 
in various ways, (i) A member in one place is re- 
ceived as a member everywhere else by his own 
branch of the Society, and if he brings suitable 
official letters with him becomes an active mem- 
ber of the meeting to which he removes. (2) A 
minister if he removes into the limits of another 
Yearly Meeting is, on presenting the proper cre- 
dentials, received, without further action, as a full 
minister.^ (3) Ministers of one Yearly Meeting, 
who feel it right to travel and labor as preachers 
elsewhere, are received, if presenting proper cre- 
dentials, without transfer of their membership, and 
are assisted in their work, they for the time being 
putting themselves under the authority of the 
meetings where they happen to be.^ (4) Each 
Yearly Meeting addresses all the others belong- 
ing to its section of the Society every year an 
** epistle*' expressing Christian sympathy and 
giving information as to its work.^ This method 
of correspondence is, probably, unique, and has 
played an important part in the history of the de- 
nomination. When separations have occurred in 
one Yearly Meeting and both divisions send out 
epistles to the other Yearly Meetings, each of 
them decides which division to recognize ; and 
whichever one is recognized has its epistle read 

^ Philadelphia Yearly Meeting (Orthodox) must be excepted 
from this statement. 

2 Except to some extent in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting 
(Orthodox). 



14 The Friends. 

and answered. By an unfortunate logical strict- 
ness the result of this has been that, if two Yearly 
Meetings having such a question before them 
should reach different conclusions, this alone has 
been considered sufficient reason for discontinuing 
correspondence with each other, for correspond- 
ence has been interpreted to mean indorsement 
of the position held, at least on Inter-Yearly 
Meeting matters.^ (5) There are various Inter- 
Yearly Meeting organizations officially recognized. 
Thus the ** Hicksites " have their Union for Philan- 
thropic Labor, and on Indian Affairs, and the 
Orthodox have their Associated Committee on 
Indian Affairs, the Peace Association of Friends 
in America, and The American Friends Board of 
Foreign Missions (6) Delegated advisory confer- 
ences are held. Of these the Orthodox have held 
several, and in 1902 The Five-Years Meeting was 
established.^ (7) The visits of ministers and other 
members of the one Yearly Meeting to other 
Yearly Meetings during their sessions is a very 
strong practical bond of unity. (8) Among the 
Orthodox, whenever a new Yearly Meeting is to 
be established the Yearly Meeting proposing the 
action asks the consent of the others.^ 

Each Yearly Meeting prepares and adopts its 
own Book of Discipline for the regulation of its 

1 It has been on this ground that the correspondence between 
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting and other Yearly Meetings has 
ceased. 

2 See pages 24-26. 

s This is now done through the Five-Years Meeting. 



Introduction. 15 

own meetings and members. There is a very close 
resemblance between these Disciplines taken as a 
whole, though there are also wide divergencies.^ 

The Yearly Meeting is the unit of authority in 
the Society ; to it belongs every man, woman, and 
child who is counted in its membership. Every 
one of these has an equal right to speak on any 
matter that may be before the meeting, for it is 
not a delegated body. It is true that the meet- 
ings immediately next to it in rank send represen- 
tatives (sometimes called delegates), but this is 
simply to insure a representation from the various 
quarters. Certain duties, such as the nomination 
of the chief officers for the year, devolve upon the 
representatives, and any matters may be referred 
to them as a convenient committee by the meet- 
ing at large. The meetings are organized by the 
appointment of a clerk and assistants. There is 
no president. The clerk combines the presiding 
officer and secretary in himself, but the discussions 
are not conducted on parliamentary rules.^ A 
subject is introduced and freely discussed, and at 
the conclusion the clerk draws up what he believes 
to be the general judgment of the meeting as de- 
veloped by the discussion, and reads it to the 

^ In 1901-1902 all the Orthodox Yearly Meetings except Phila- 
delphia, Ohio, and Canada adopted a Discipline which is uniform, 
except where modified in minor points to suit special circum- 
stances. 

2 In some Yearly Meetings (Orthodox), especially where the 
amount of business to be transacted in a limited time is great, it 
has been thought necessary to make use of methods similar to 
parliamentary ones. 



i6 The Friends. 

meeting, and if it is approved it is recorded as the 
decision. No vote is taken, for the feeling is that 
in spiritual matters majorities are not safe guides, 
and among Friends the decision oftener turns upon 
the sentiments expressed by the more experienced 
and spiritually-minded members than upon the 
actual number of voices, though of course num- 
bers have weight. The belief is that the guidance 
of the Lord is to be realized and followed in the 
business meeting, and there is therefore an entire 
absence of evidences of applause, or of motions 
and counter-motions. The practical result of this 
system is conservative, for the theory is that, so 
far as possible, any new step shall be taken as the 
united action of the meeting; and if a reasonable 
number, even though a minority, be dissatisfied 
with a proposition, it is either dropped or modified, 
the effort being to convince but not to force. 
Nearly all the separations that have occurred have 
been due to the neglect of this principle. 

The position of women is one of absolute 
equality with men.^ In most cases among the 
Orthodox the sessions are held with the men 
and women meeting together, in others separately. 
When the latter practice is followed the proposi- 
tions adopted by one meeting are sent for approval 
to the other, where they may be rejected or 
adopted. 

1 This is not strictly correct as far as Philadelphia (Orthodox) 
is concerned, and perhaps is not fully the case as regards the 
business of the church among the " Wilburites," and '* Primitive." 



Introduction. 17 

It is competent for a Yearly Meeting at any 
given year to make any change in its Discipline, 
though it is customary to appoint a committee to 
consider important changes for a year and then 
report/ The decisions of the Yearly Meeting are 
binding on all the meetings within the limits of 
its jurisdiction. It is also the only authoritative 
interpreter of the Discipline, and the final court 
of appeal. During its recess it is represented by 
an executive committee called the Permanent 
Board or Representative Meeting,^ which holds 
sessions as stated times and upon special call. It 
has a few special duties, but is not allowed in any 
way to interfere with or to enforce the discipline. 

In addition to this, the Yearly Meetings have 
standing committees on various subjects, such as 
peace, education, temperance, etc. The Orthodox 
bodies, with one or two exceptions, have also com- 
mittees on home and foreign missions, evangeliza- 
tion, temperance, etc. 

Every Yearly Meeting is divided into quarterly 
meetings. These meet four times a year,^ and re- 
ceive reports from the meetings which constitute 
them (monthly meetings). A summary of these 
reports is made and forwarded to the Yearly 

1 In those Meetings belonging to the Five-Years Meeting 
changes must be approved by the latter body. 

2 This committee, owing to the fact that the first object of its 
appointment was to assist members who were suffering for their 
principles, was called for many years the " Meeting for Suf- 
ferings," a name still retained in a few cases. 

^ In some cases these meet but three times or even only twice 
a year, in which case they are called four-months meetings or 
half-year's meetings, respectively. 
2 



i8 The Friends. 

Meeting. As in the Yearly so in the quarterly 
meetings, every member is entitled to take part in 
the discussions, the same order of procedure pre- 
vailing in them as in the former. The quarterly 
meeting takes cognizance of the action of the 
monthly meeting, and can be appealed to w^hen- 
ever dissatisfaction is felt with the action of a 
lower meeting. Its assent is required for the 
establishment of any new meeting within its limits. 
When a new quarterly meeting is to be established, 
however, the consent of the Yearly Meeting is 
necessary. It appoints its own committees on 
various lines of Christian work, and sends down 
word to the monthly meetings how much each 
meeting is expected to contribute toward the 
expenses of the Yearly Meeting. 

The monthly meeting is the executive power so 
far as the membership is concerned, subject to 
appeal to the quarterly and Yearly meetings. In 
practical working, however, its acts are seldom 
criticised by its superior meetings, and its execu- 
tive duties make it a most important body. It 
receives and on occasion can disown (i. e., expel) 
members, and it has the direct oversight of the 
congregations composing it. Its organization is 
similar to that of other ** business meetings or 
meetings for discipline *' (as they are called in 
distinction to the " meetings for worship ''). In 
addition to this and its committees, its regular 
officers are elders and overseers. The duties of 
the former are, first, to encourage and counsel the 



Introduction. 19 

ministers, and second, to have a Christian care 
over the membership. In some places they hold 
office for life or good behavior, in others for a 
term of years. They are appointed by the joint 
action of the monthly meeting and the quarterly 
meeting of ministers and elders, which will be dis- 
cussed presently. The overseers are (i) a com- 
mittee to receive applications for admission to 
membership before being presented to the monthly 
meeting. (2) Their duty is to be on the lookout for 
any in the meeting in need of spiritual or temporal 
aid. (3) They are to admonish offenders and en- 
deavor to restore them ; and if they fail in this, 
they are to report to the monthly meeting for its 
action. (4) In some localities, they have special 
duties in regard to the holding of church property. 
(5) They prepare at stated times in the year an- 
swers to certain questions, called ** queries,'* direc- 
ted by the Discipline to be answered in order to 
show the condition of church life and progress. 
These answers are laid before the monthly or pre- 
parative meeting^ for emendation or approval, and 
to be forwarded to the superior meetings.^ They 



1 Preparative meetings are wholly subordinate to monthly 
meetings, and usually consist of but one meeting for worship. 
Their powers are small in America. When they exist it is chiefly 
for the purpose of sending answers to the queries and appointing 
delegates to the monthly meeting. Under the *' Constitution 
and Discipline," (1900), Preparative Meetings have been abolished 
in those Yearly Meetings adopting the Discipline, though Monthly 
Meetings have the power to establish " local meetings for 
business." 

2 By the ** Constitution and Discipline " (1900) Queries are 
read and seriously considered in Monthly and Quarterly Meetings 



20 The Friends. 

are appointed directly by the monthly meeting 
alone, and the length of their tenure of office 
varies in different places. 

Ministers have not been referred to as regular 
officers. The reason of this has been that the 
organization is considered complete, as an or- 
ganization, without them. The Disciplines re- 
quire the appointment of elders and overseers, 
but do not require that of ministers. There is no 
provision in the Disciplines for their training at 
seminaries or otherwise.^ The theory is that the 
church recognizes when the gift and the qualifica- 
tion have been committed to a man or woman, 
and acknowledges it, after which he or she is called 
an ''acknowledged,** ** recommended,*' or "re- 
corded'* minister. There is no ceremony of ordina- 
tion. The minister continues to follow his or- 
dinary vocation, except when for the time being 
he is prevented from so doing by special religious 
service at home or abroad ; in such case, if his 
work has the approbation of the meeting, his 
wants are supplied ; but as minister he receives 
no salary.^ 



three times a year, but not answered. Annual reports as to the 
state of the church are forwarded to the Yearly Meeting through 
the Quarterly Meetings. 

1 There are at most, if not all of the Friends' colleges, courses 
in Biblical and Religious Instruction, but these are open to all 
students. Summer schools are frequently held both among the 
Orthodox and " Hicksites," where instruction is given in the 
Bible, Theological subjects, and in the best methods of practical 
religious work. 

2 The custom in this respect has been modified in many places 
among the Orthodox. 



Introduction. 21 

The acknowledgment, or recording, of a minister 
IS accomplished as follows : A Friends* meeting 
for worship is supposed to be held under the im- 
mediate direction of the Spirit of Christ. ^ The 
congregation meets in silence, with no prearrange- 
ment of service ; ^ there is no stated length for 
any sermon, prayer, or exhortation, and often 
several persons, not necessarily ministers, take 
part during the same meeting. If any speak in a 
way that appears to lack the evidence of having 
a right call, it is the duty of the elders to admonish 
such ; if they speak with acceptance, the elders 
are to encourage and advise them. If one has 
spoken frequently and is seen to have a gift, it is 
acknowledged by the church and a record made 
of it ; the action is in this case, as in that of the 
elders, taken conjointly by the monthly meeting 
and the quarterly meeting of ministers and elders.* 
The minister is the only officer, if such he can 
be called, who is not affected by change of resi- 
dence beyond the limits of the monthly meet- 
ing. ' 

It remains now to consider the constitution of 
the meeting on ** ministry and oversight,'* called 
also in many places the meeting of " ministers 

^ See p. 23. 

2 The custom in this respect has been modified in many places 
among the Orthodox. 

3 In some Yearly Meetings among the Orthodox certain doc- 
trinal questions are asked of the ministers and elders, and no one 
is allowed by discipline to hold office unless these can be satis- 
factorily answered. 

* This is not the case with Philadelphia Yearly Meeting 
(Orthodox). 



22 The Friends. 

and elders/' and sometimes the "select meeting." 
In every Yearly Meeting the ministers and elders, 
in most places the overseers as well, and some- 
times also persons appointed to sit with them, are 
required to meet together at regular times, gener- 
ally every three months, to review the state of the 
membership and to consider the needs of the work, 
but without disciplinary powers. They are fre- 
quently the ones to propose a suitable person to the 
monthy meeting for acknowledgment as a min- 
ister. They also are required to read and consider, 
and often to answer certain '' queries '' applying 
especially to them as to doctrine, life, and practice ; 
these are forwarded to a quarterly meeting of 
similar character, to which representatives are 
sent. This meeting is composed of the several 
monthly meetings on ministry and oversight 
within the limits of the ordinary quarterly meet- 
ing. It unites with the monthly meetings in the 
acknowledgment of ministers or appointment of 
elders, or, when need requires, in the removal of 
them from office. Once a year it forwards its 
summary of the reports from its lower meetings 
to the Yearly Meeting on Ministry and Oversight, 
(or of Ministers and Elders). The only duty of 
this latter meeting beyond that of advice and rec- 
ommendation is to sanction the action of the 
monthly and quarterly meetings (of the general 
membership), or to refuse its sanction to consent- 
ing to ministers traveling on religious service be- 
yond the seas. 



introduction. 23 

This brings us to a peculiarity of the Society of 
Friends, which is its arrangement for its ministers 
traveling. When a minister feels it right to go to a 
place more or less distant to engage in some form of 
religious work, he asks the monthly meeting to 
which he belongs for liberty to go. When he ex- 
pects to engage in a more extensive work it is re- 
quired that he obtain the consent of the quarterly 
meeting as well. When the consent is obtained the 
clerks of the meetings give him a copy of the 
minute which states the action of the meeting. 
If the permission is refused, he is expected to re- 
main at home. When he wishes to cross the 
ocean in his religious labor, the certificate is not 
complete without the indorsement of the Yearly 
Meeting on Ministry and Oversight ^ (or of Min- 
isters and Elders). The discipline requires that a 
committee be appointed to see that such are 
suitably provided with pecuniary means for defray, 
ing expenses, etc. 

Last in order, though first in importance, is the 
individual congregation known as the Meeting for 
Worship, the character of which is sufficiently 
described elsewhere.^ Meetings are always held 
on the first day of the week, and usually on one 
week-day also.^ 

1 Under the new " Constitution and Discipline " (Orthodox), 
the consent of the Yearly Meeting at large must also be obtained. 

2 See pp. 21, 56. 

^ It has been thought best (1905) to let the preceding paragraphs 
stand essentially as in previous editions, for the statements are 
still applicable to many of those calling themselves Friends. 



24 The Friends* 

As stated elsewhere/ conferences of all the Or- 
thodox American Yearly Meetings were held in 
1887, 1892, and 1897. At this last conference the 
subject of a uniform Discipline for all the Yearly 
Meetings was discussed, and a committee was ap- 
pointed to prepare the draft of one to be pre- 
sented to the Yearly Meetings. This was done, 
and by 1902 all the American Orthodox Yearly 
Meetings except Canada, Ohio, and Philadelphia 
had adopted " The Constitution and Discipline 
for the American Yearly Meetings of Friends."' 

The Yearly Meetings which adopted the new 
Discipline thereby entered into a somewhat closer 
union than had before existed, though the bond 
is still a loose one. The association closely re- 
sembles the Confederation which existed between 
the States of the American Union before the adop- 
tion of the Constitution. The character of this 
union of the meetings is thus described in the Dis- 
cipline itself : ' — '* Each Yearly Meeting is indepen- 
dent in the transaction of its business. Those 
Yearly Meetings which unite in this Constitution 
and Discipline, and, under its provisions, delegate 

Important modifications have been made, however, in the or- 
ganisation of the Orthodox body, owing to the adoption of a new 
general Discipline by most of the American Yearly Meetings 
(Orthodox), and these call for special notice. 

1 Chapter VIII. 

2 As stated elsewhere, Canada adopted the Constitution in 
1900, but in 1901 re-considered the subject and reversed its action. 
The chief objection was that the document was not suited to 
their special needs. Ohio rejected it on the ground that it was 
not definite enough on points of doctrine. Philadelphia did not 
consider it at all. 

^ Constitution and Discipline, Part II, chap. i. 



Introduction. 25 

certain authority to the Five-Years Meeting, re- 
tain their original independence, and in its exer- 

cise, grant the power hereinafter described 

Each Yearly Meeting retains the authority to 
adopt additional disciplinary regulations not in- 
consistent herewith/' ^ 

Some of the more important results of the 
adoption of this Constitution are, — uniformity 
in the method of recording ministers ; in granting 
certificates to ministers for traveling on religious 
service; in the appointment of Permanent Boards ; 
and in the manner of transacting church business. 
The Constitution has abolished Preparative Meet- 
ings ; it has substituted for the children of members 
^* associate membership ** instead of ** birthright 
membership,'* and has provided an associate 
membership for adults. 

While " pastors *' are not mentioned by name, 
*' pastoral service*' is recognized and rules and 
advices concerning its exercise are laid down. 

It provides for a meeting or conference once in 
five years of delegates ^ from all the yearly meet- 
ings which have adopted the Constitution ; this 



1 Changes and modifications must be submitted to the next 
Five- Years Meeting for approval. Const, and Disc. Part II, 
chap. X. 

2 Delegates are chosen on the basis of numbers, and the same 
rule is followed as was observed in the case of the conferences of 
1892 and 1897. " Each Yearly Meeting shall be entitled to five 
delegates, and to an additional delegate for each one thousand 
members or fraction thereof greater than five hundred." Part II, 
chap, xii., sect. i. Unlike Yearly Meetings, the Five-Years 
Meeting is a strictly delegated body in which only delegates can 
take part. 



26 The Friends. 

conference to be called The Five-Years Meet- 
ing. 

The Constitution does not contain any creed or 
formal Declaration of Faith, though a general 
statement of belief is given. For more explicit 
statements of belief reference is made to those 
officially put forth at various times, and especially 
to the letter of George Fox to the Governor of 
Barbadoes in 1671, and to the Declaration of Faith 
issued by the Richmond Conference in 1887. 

The Constitution is briefer, simpler, more logi- 
cal than the Disciplines which preceded it, and is 
probably better fitted to present-day needs. On 
the other hand it is somewhat lacking on the spir- 
itual side. While it has been subjected to some 
severe criticism, it has worked so far remarkably 
well. 



CHAPTER I. 
Bl^GINNING IN i^NGlVAND. 

AMONG the many denominations which ap- 
peared in England during the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries, that time of religious 
upheaval, none is more worthy of attention than 
the Friends. Though scarcely one of its doc- 
trines was absolutely new, yet the combina- 
tion of so many radical tenets produced a remark- 
able factor in the religious economy of Christen- 
dom, the effects of which are only beginning to be 
appreciated. 

" England had been stunned for twenty years 
with religious polemics. The forms of church 
government — presbyterianism and prelacy — the 
claims of the independents and the clamors of the 
sectaries, the respective rights of the pastors and 
the people, were discussed in every pulpit, they 
distracted every parish and every house.*' ^ Torn 
by civil war, agitated with bitter theological dis- 
putes, full of men dissatisfied with church, with 
state, with almost every existing institution, Eng- 
land was indeed in a sad way. It was amid such 
surroundings, influenced by such currents of 

1 J. B. Marsden, " History of the Later Puritans," 2d ed., 
London, 1854, p. 235. 

27 



28 The Friends. 

thought, out of such a hurly-burly, that the Society 
of Friends arose.^ 

The history of the early years of the Society is 
the history of its founder.^ George Fox was born 
at Fenny Drayton, sometimes known as Drayton, 
in the Clay, Leicestershire, July,^ 1624. ** My 
father's name w^as Christopher Fox ; he was by 
profession a weaver, an honest man. . , . The 
neighbors called him Righteous Christen My 
mother was an upright woman ; her maiden name 
was Mary Lago, of the family of the Lagos, and 
of the stock of the martyrs." * His youth " was 
endued with a gravity and stayedness of mind 
that is seldom seen in children.*' ^ 

Notwithstanding his sober and serious youth, he 
seems to have had no idea that he was to be called 
to any special work, and, as with many a man, a 
slight thing, apparently, proved the turning point 
in his life. Being asked to drink healths by some 
young men who were ** professors *' of religion, he 



1 William Thistlethwaite, " Lectures on the Rise and Progress 
of Friends," London, 1865, pp. 1-35. 

2 " Tlie ideas of Quakerism came from many sources, foreign 
and English, but the formation of the Friends' Society was due to 
one man." G. M. Trevelyan, " England under the Stuarts," 
London, 1904, p. 312. 

^ The exact date is not known. 

^"Journal "of George Fox, London, 1694, p. i. This work 
is uniformly referred to as " Journal." We hear little or nothing 
of George Fox's relatives except now and then he simply mentions 
visiting them. (But see "Journal," pp. 390, 396.) Charles 
Marshall says, under date of "nth month, 19th, 1671 " : "I went 
to see G. F.'s mother in Leicestershire." ('* Journal '* of Charles 
Marshall, London, 1844, p. 17.) She died in 1674, " Journal," 396. 

s William Sewel, " History of the Quakers," London, 1725, 2d 
ed., p. 6. 



Beginning in England. 29 

was so grieved that such persons should act in this 
way that he threw down his share of the cost of the 
previous entertainment and went out of the room. 
A sleepless night followed, during which he be- 
lieved he heard the call of the Lord summoning him 
to leave all things. He went from place to place 
seeking peace of mind ; once he says that ** a strong 
temptation to despair came upon me, and then I 
saw how Christ was tempted, and mighty troubles 
I was in.** He went from ** priest to priest ** to get 
help, but found them sorry comforters, for they 
did not see that he was one who needed spiritual 
food and enlightenment, not mental distraction. 
He remained more than a year in this state. At 
last, he writes, ** about the beginning of the year 
1646, as I was going to Coventry and entering 
toward the gate, a consideration arose in me how 
it was said that all Christians are believers, both 
Protestants and Papists. And the Lord opened 
to me that if all were believers, then were they all 
born of God and passed from death to life, and 
that none were true believers but such, and though 
others said they were believers yet they were not. 
Another time, as I was walking in a field on a First- 
day morning, the Lord opened to me that being 
bred at Oxford or Cambridge was not enough to 
fit and qualify men to be ministers of Christ ; and 
I stranged at it, because it was the common belief 
of people.** ^ He still did not find absolute peace, 

1 "Journal," pp. 3-6. 



30 The Friends. 

but continued to go up and down through the 
country. 

After the conviction that education was no es- 
sential qualification of a minister, he naturally 
turned more and more to the dissenters, but he 
found little satisfaction with most of them. So 
he goes on to say : " When ... I had nothing 
outwardly to help me, nor could tell what to do, 
then, oh, then I heard a voice which said, ' There 
is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy 
condition,* and when I heard it my heart did leap 
for joy/* ^ And when he cried to the Lord, 
" * Why should I be thus, seeing I was never ad- 
dicted to commit those evils ? ' the Lord answered 
that it was needful I should have a sense of all 
conditions — how else should I speak to all condi- 
tions ? And in this I saw the infinite love of God. 
I saw also that there was an ocean of darkness 
and death, but an infinite ocean of light and love 
which flowed over the ocean of darkness.** * 
Again he says : " Now was I come up in spirit 
through the flaming sword into the Paradise of 
God. All things were new, and all creation gave 
another smell unto me beyond what words can 
utter.** ^ This was when he was about twenty- 
three. 

The sentences quoted He at the root of Fox's 
practice and teaching — consistency of the outward 
life with the profession ; the necessity of divine 

1 " Journal/' p. 8. « Ibid,, pp. 13, 17. ^ Ibid., p. 17. 



Beginning in England. 31 

power within the man to enable him to live in ac- 
cordance with the will of God ; the direct com- 
munication of this will to every believer in the 
Lord Jesus Christ. His labors were from first to 
last a comment on the text, " If we live by the 
Spirit, by the Spirit let us also walk.** ^ 

Fox does not seem to have preached, in the or- 
dinary acceptation of the term, until late in the 
year 1647. And then, Sewel says, his preaching 
*' chiefly consisted of some few but powerful and 
piercing words, to those whose hearts were in some 
measure prepared to be capable of receiving this 
doctrine.** ^ Later, he became, perhaps, the most 
powerful preacher of his day. He spoke with a 
force and earnestness which were hard to with- 
stand. He was truly inspired, speaking in a 
remarkable manner to the condition of those who 
heard him. "To hear Fox preach once in the 
churchyard as he passed through the town, or to 
spend an evening with him by the fireside, often 
was enough to change a persecutor into an en- 
thusiast, to emancipate a man from tjie intellectual 
habits and social customs of a lifetime.** ' "He 
had,** said William Penn (Preface to Fox*s Jour- 
nal), " an extraordinary gift in opening the Scrip- 
tures. . . But above all he excelled in prayer. . . 



1 Compare W. James " Varieties of Religious Experience/' 
New York, 1902, pp. 7, 8. 

2 " Journal," p. 13; Sewel, p. 13; " First Publishers of Truth," 
London, 1904, pp. 47, 48. 

^ G. M. Trevelyan, ** England under the Stuarts," London, 
I904> PP- 312, 3^3' 



32 The Friends. 

The most awful living frame I ever beheld, I must 
say, was his in prayer/' 

There seems little doubt that, as Sewel says, 
many if not most of the early converts of Fox 
were those who, like himself, were believers in the 
fundamental doctrines of Christianity, but, like 
him also, dissatisfied with the teachings and prac- 
tices of the day, were longing for a higher and 
more spiritual life/ The meetings, which were at 
that time frequently held for discussion of points 
of doctrine, afforded Fox admirable opportunities 
for spreading his views. He speaks of a " meeting 
of priests and professors at a justice's house," " a 
great meeting at Leicester for a dispute wherein 
both Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, and 
Common-Prayer men were said to be all con- 
cerned." ^ ** This meeting was in a steeple-house," 
and as it is the first record of Fox entering one of 
those buildings to speak, it will be well to say a 
few words respecting the practice the early Friends 
had of entering places of worship, and, as is so 
often charged, of interrupting public worship.' 
It is true that there are instances of Friends dis- 
turbing public worship, but the number of cases 
has been greatly exaggerated. It was usually 
after the " priest " had finished that the Friend 

1 Trevelyan, as above, p. 313. ^ " Journal," pp. 14, 15. 

3 The phrase "steeple-house" is not peculiar to Friends, nor 
did they originate it ; it is found, for instance, in Edwards's 
" Gangraena," the third edition of which was published before 
Fox began to preach. And other cases might be cited. (" Gan- 
graena," etc., Thomas Edwards, 3d ed., London, 1646, part ii., 
P- 4) 



Beginning in England. 33 

spoke, and then it was on account of the unpala- 
table doctrine, rather than for the interruption, 
that he suffered. The places of worship he en- 
tered were usually those belonging to the Inde- 
pendents, and this body allowed discussion after 
the sermon.^ Fox frequently speaks of waiting 
until the minister had finished, and once at least 
he was invited up into the pulpit. A striking 
instance occurred at Ulverstone, where Margaret 
Fell, who, when he was interrupted as he was 
speaking after the " priest," called out, " Why 
may not he speak as well as any other? '* ^ 

Had it not been for his strong common sense, 
Fox might have gone through an experience some- 
what similar to that of his adherent, James Nayler,' 
or have become a second Ludowick Muggleton. 

Though one of the most mystical of modern 
reformers, Fox was at the same time one of the 

^ " After all this is done [praying, preaching by the pastor, 
etc.] they [the Independents] have yet another exercise, wherein 
by way of conference, questioning, and disputation every one of 
the congregation may propound publicly and press their scruples, 
doubts, and objections against anything which that day they have 
heard." ('* A Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time," etc., 
Robert Baylie, London, 1645, P- TP- This book also was pu- 
blished before George Fox began to preach. 

2 " Journal," pp. 56, 57, 61, 78, 109 ; see also R. Barclay, " Inner 
Life," pp. 274-293. *' First Publishers of Truth," London, 1904, 
p. 33; Bowden, vol. i, pp. 73-81. 

2 Nayler is often quoted as an example to prove the wild en- 
thusiasm of the early Friends ; even so careful a writer as H. 
Weingarten being deceived as to the true character of the Nayler 
episode. (" Die Revolutionskirchen Englands," Leipzig, 1868, p. 
271.) Nayler's actions were disavowed by Friends at the time, 
and he recanted, confessed his error, and was restored. (Sewel, 
pp. 147-155.) T. E. Harvey, "Rise of the Quakers," London, 
1905, pp. lOI-III. 



34 The Friends. 

most practical ; all his spiritual teaching, from the 
very first, was accompanied not only by desires, 
but by efforts for the moral, political, and social 
welfare of his hearers; his Journal is full of prac- 
tical suggestions. He '' was the first who raised 
his voice against the evils of West Indian slavery. 
He claimed freedom of opinion in things per- 
taining to God. ... He could not conceive of 
religion and morality apart.** ^ *' Instead of the 
military spirit he proclaimed the wickedness of all 
war. Instead of the reliance on force, he enjoined 
martyrdom. Instead of the suppression of vice, 
the influence of example. In place of the religion 
of gloom and reprobation he opened the inner well- 
springs of constant joy. In place of the hell 
waiting the sinner in the next world, he taught 
men to unfold the heaven that each carried hidden 
within himself on earth,'* ^ 

No man was more absolutely truthful than he, 
no one could be more desirous to get at the very 
roots of things. It was this sincerity of character 
and purpose which led him to reject almost with 
scorn all language and manners which appeared to 
convey any impression other than the truth.^ 

It does not seem to have been the intention at 
first to establish a new branch of the church. Fox 
and his early adherents felt that their message was 

^ B. F. Westcott, " Social Aspects of Christianity/' London, 
1887, pp. 129, 130. 

^ G. M. Trevelyan, " England under the Stuarts," London, 
1904, p. 314 ; for P'ox*s views on " War " see " Journal," pp, 275, 
630. ^ '* Journal/' p. 24. 



Beginning in England. 35 

to the church at large, but their testimony against 
** steeple-houses '' and ** priests ** necessarily caused 
them to meet by themselves for worship, and 
probably before he or they realized it meetings for 
worship were actually established. Fox, however, 
soon recognized this fact, and wherever oppor- 
tunity offered set up meetings. He tells us 
** that the truth sprang up first (to us, as to be a 
people to the Lord) in Leicestershire in 1644." 
This probably refers to his own personal experi- 
ence. He goes on to describe how the movement 
spread first to the neighboring counties, then, by 
1654, over England, Scotland, and Ireland. ** In 
1655 many went beyond seas,'* and "in 1656 truth 
brake forth in America." ^ 

The number of his adherents rapidly increased, 
and they, like Fox, were filled with zeal to spread 
what was to them glad tidings to all people.^ The 

1 "Epistles," London, 1698, p. 2. 

2 Fox's illiteracy has often been spoken of. If " illiteracy " 
means erratic spelling, and small knowledge of books. Fox was 
certainly "illiterate." (See Friends Historical Journal, vol. i, p. 
6, 1903.) But it must be remembered that spelling in Fox's day 
was largely phonetic, (J. O. Halliwell-Phillipps, in " New Lamps 
or Old," gives an instance where in a single entry of a Parish Re- 
gister written, at the same time by the same man the same name 
in the same family is spelled three different w^ays.) On the other 
hand, if " illiterate " means " ignorant," Fox's Journal, Epistles, 
Tracts, the unanimous testimony of those who knew him best, 
and the manner in which he discomfited his accusers amply dis- 
prove the charge. See Sewel, p. 25. The fact remains that he 
influenced and retained the esteem and affection of men like 
Robert Barclay, William Penn, Thomas Ellwood, and many 
others — highly educated men. (See Sewel, p. 25, and Penn's 
preface to Fox's "Journal," Ellwood's "Autobiography,") 
While, as has been almost always the case in great religious re- 
vivals, his adherents were primarily drawn from the lower middle 
class, it was by no means exclusively so, and he was also joined 



36 The Friends. 

missionary activity of the early Friends has, 
perhaps, only been equaled in modern times by 
the Jesuits. 

In a " General Epistle *' dated 1660, '' Germany, 
America, Virginia, and many other places, as 
Florence, Mantua, Palatine, Tuscany, Italy, 
Rome, Turkey, Jerusalem, France, Geneva, 
Norway, Barbadoes, Bermuda, Antigua, Jamaica, 
Surinam, and Newfoundland,** are mentioned as 
having been visited by Friends. It is true that 
there was no systematic missionary effort, but 
even if, as was often the case, the visits were made 
singly, or two by two, the extensive service and 
the great expense, which was borne by the mem- 
bership at large, show the true spirit of mission- 
ary enterprise/ The fact that little or no record 
remains of many of these visits does not show 
that they were made in vain. 

It is clear that for some time no formulated 
statement of doctrine was made. ** The purport 
of their doctrine and ministry,** says William Penn, 
'* for the most part is what other professors of 
Christianity pretend to hold in words and forms. '*^ 



heart and soul by the men just named, as well as by many others, 
such as Isaac Penington, Samuel Fisher, Margaret Fell, who with 
a hundred more would have adorned any Christian body. Some 
of his followers had been *' priests." In the earlier years there 
seem to have been very few wage-earners among the converts. 

1 WiUiam Beck, " The Friends," London, 1893, p. 92. ** Epis- 
tles," etc., London, 1858, p. ix., where a detailed account of 
receipts and expenditures is given, the latter amounting to ^490 
13s. 5d. (date, about 1659). See also Bowden, vol. i., p. 58. 

2 Preface to Fox's " Journal," p. xiii. ; " Rise and Progress," 
P-34. 



Beginning in England. 37 

But to this was added a belief in the direct revela- 
tion of Christ to the soul. " Now the Lord hath 
opened to me by his invisible power how that 
every man was enlightened by the divine Light 
of Christ, and I saw it shine through all. And 
they that believe in it came out of condemnation, 
and came by the light of life, and became the 
children of it ; but they that hated it and did not 
believe in it, were condemned by it, though they 
made a profession of Christ.'' ^ ** Now I was sent," 
Fox says, "to turn people from darkness to light, 
that they might receive Christ Jesus ; for to as 
many as should receive him in his light I saw 
that he would give power to become the sons of 
God, which I had obtained by receiving Christ ; 
and I was to direct people to the Spirit that gave 
forth the Scriptures by which they might be led 
into all truth and so up to Christ and God, as they 
had been who gave them forth. ... I saw that 
the grace of God which brings salvation had ap- 
peared to all men, and that the manifestation of 
the Spirit of God was given to every man to pro- 
fit withal."' 

He and his followers saw that whenever there 
was a human soul, Christ Jesus, the Light of the 
world, had called that soul, and by his Spirit had 
visited it, that he might bring it to himself. We 
can imagine what a wonderful discovery this 
must have been to men brought up to believe 

1 " Journal," p. 22. ^ " Journal," p. 22. 



38 The Friends. 

in a limited salvation, open only to an elect 
few, or " discontented with second-hand truths." 

What wonder that they felt constrained to tell 
all men that God was seeking their salvation, not 
their destruction, and that He was personally 
calling each one to himself. They thus presented 
an entire different picture of God from that pre- 
sented by the Puritans, and their zeal was such in 
those early days that the term Quaker meant, in 
the minds of a large numbers of outsiders, a peo- 
ple who were a terror to their religious opponents, 
an unanswerable puzzle to the magistrates, and 
whose " frenzy ** neither pillory, whipping-post, 
jail, nor gallows could tame. It was this sense of 
the universality of the work of the Holy Spirit, 
and of the completeness of the salvation for each 
individual man through Jesus Christ, which not 
only made them so hopeful for the whole race, 
but also so ready to work for the bettering of man- 
kind. 

There was no one too high to be spoken to, 
no one too low to be considered. Thus we find 
Oliver Cromwell, the Pope, the Sultan visited, 
and the slave and Indian pleaded for. Absolute 
unhesitating obedience to what was believed to be 
the will of God was characteristic of Fox and his 
associates, and a knowledge of this fact will ex- 
plain many things otherwise inexplicable. 
Matters which might to an outsider seem of little 
moment were held of supreme importance if be- 
lieved to be required or forbidden as the case 



Beginning in England. 39 

might be. Expediency was a word that hardly- 
possessed any meaning for them/ 

He soon gathered a band of those who felt they 
were called to preach and exhort. There was no 
ordination, there was no formal recognition of 
their position, for there was no church organiza- 
tion ; but by 1654 there were "sixty ministers '"^ 
traveling up and down. Many of these mission- 
aries were young in years,^ few beyond the prime 
of life. There seems to have been no organized 
arrangements for these ministers ; they went 
wherever they believed the Lord sent them, 
whether it was to a neighboring county or to a 
distant land, though not infrequently counsel was 
taken with George Fox, when practicable, or with 
other Friends.* The adhesion of Margaret Fell, 
the wife of Judge Fell of Swarthmoor Hall, near 
Ulverstone, was a great support. She was a 
woman of remarkable attainments, great executive 



^ George Fox on one occasion when a pardon was offered him, 
refused to be released from a prison in which he had been con- 
fined for seven months, though he was very ill. He says : " I 
was not free to receive a pardon, knowing I had not done 
evil. . . . P'or I had rather have lain in prison all my days than 
have come out in any way dishonorable to truth." (" Journal," 
p. 405.) 

2 " Journal," p. 124 ; Sewel, p. ']Z. See also "Tirst Publishers 
of Truth," London, 1904. 

^ James Parnell, James Dickinson, and William Caton began 
to preach at eighteen, the first dying in prison after most cruel 
treatment at nineteen; Edward Burrough died in prison at 
twenty-eight. 

^ " Journal " of John Taylor (1657), York, 1830, p. 85 (a reprint 
of ed. 1710) ; " Joumal"of John Banks, London, 1712, pp. 61;- 
68 ; "Truth Exalted," etc., John Burnyeat, London, 1691, pp. 21, 
24, 27, etc. 



40 The Friends. 

ability, and excellent judgment. Her husband, 
Judge Fell, though he never joined the Society, 
was a powerful friend to it. Margaret Fell was 
a woman of property and position, and used 
both liberally in aid of the new movement.^ 
She has been compared, and not without reason, 
to Lady Huntingdon among the early Methodists, 
Her house soon became the headquarters of the 
missionary band, her advice was sought and given, 
and though comparatively few of her own letters 
have been perserved, very many of those addressed 
to her are still in existence,* over four hundred 
being in the Devonshire House collection alone. 
There is no doubt also that at Swarthmoor Hall 
contributions were received for the expenses of 
those traveling and for the relief of those suffer- 
ing for their principles. The funds thus received 
were distributed as occasion required. Many of 
the early preachers came from the neighborhood 
of Swarthmoor, which fact also helps to account 
for Margaret Fell's great influence.^ 



^ " The Fells of Swarthmoor Hall," Maria Webb, 2d. ed., Lon- 
don, 1867, PP« 70 ff' ; see also " Brief Collection," etc., Margaret 
Fox, London, 17 10, 

2 ** Letters of Early Friends," John Barclay, p. 25, note, Lon- 
don, 1841 ; M. Webb, p. 82. See Margaret (Fell) Fox's Testi- 
mony concerning George Fox prefixed to his " Journal " ; also 
" Brief Collection," etc, Margaret Fox, London, 17 10. 

3 Barclay, in his ** Inner Life " (already referred to), pp. 268 ff., 
has sought to prove that Fox acted much like a modern mis- 
sionary society in supplying ministers where they were needed, and 
in displacing those who were unsuitable. He also endeavors to 
show that there was a system of itinerant preaching nearly as 
complete as that of the later Wesleyans. Barclay appears to have 
made up his mind on these points and then to have set out to 



Beginning in England. 41 

No distinct creed was preached by this early 
band, but they called every one away from de- 
pendence upon anything but Christ himself. 
They directed their hearers to the light of Christ 
within their hearts. Fox loved to dwell on the 
light of Christ. " Believe in the Light, that ye 
may become children of the Light,*' was his mes- 
sage again and again. So much did he and his 
followers dwell on this, that though at first they 
called themselves '* Children of Truth,** they were 
soon termed ** Children of Light/* ^ a name which 
they adopted and used for some time. They 
also called themselves ** Friends of Truth,** then 
** The Religious Society of Friends,** to which 
was very frequently added, ** commonly called 
Quakers.*' At present the usual name is simply 

find evidence for his view. In bringing this forward he takes 
little account of the vast amount of testimony on the other side, 
and sometimes it would seem he even ignores what does not 
make for his side. A careful examination of his arguments, and 
of many of the official documents of the Society, of Croese's, 
Sewel's, and Gough's histories (the first two being contemporary 
accounts), as well as of many of the " Journals " of early Friends 
fails to confirm his position. It is incredible that Fox, with *' his 
superiiuman truthfullness," should never have mentioned such an 
arrangement in his " Journal." Barclay's work treats with great 
ability of subjects generally neglected by other historians, gives 
much curious information, and is the result of great labor and 
much thought. It is, therefore, the more to be regretted that 
the wide circulation of the book should have given currency to 
views regarding the Society of Friends which rest on insufficient 
evidence, if they are not largely erroneous. See an able criti- 
cism, " An Examen," etc., Charles Evans, M. D., Friends' Book- 
store, Philadelphia, 1878 ; J. Winsor, '* Narrative and Critical 
History of America," Boston, 1884, vol. iii., p. 504. The little 
book, " Letters, etc., of Early Friends," A. R. Barclay (editor), 
London, 1841, pp. 274 ff., alone almost disproves his position, the 
editor being R. Barclay's uncle ! 
i " Journal," p. 238; '* First Publishers of Truth," p. 147. 



42 The Friends. 

"The Friends," and in some places ''Friends' 
Church." ' 

The phrase " Inner Light " has also become in- 
separably attached to them and their successors.^ 

Accompanying this spiritual teaching there was 
the practical testimony against oaths, as being coh- 

1 The origin of the name Quaker is thus described by George 
Fox himself: *' This was Justice Bennet of Darby, who was the 
first that called us Quakers, because I bid them tremble at the 
word of the Lord. And this was in the year 1650.'* (" Journal," 
p. 37 ; " Doctrinal Works," London, 1706, p. 507.) So also 
Sewel, who adds, the name " hath also given occasion to many 
silly stories " (Sewel, p. 24. See Gerard Groese, " The General 
History of the Quakers," London, 1696, p. 5), stories which are 
repeated to this day. (See William Hand Browne, *' Maryland," 
Boston, 1884, p. 135.) In the great Oxford English Dictionary 
under " Quaker," occurs the following extract and comment : " 1 
heare of a sect of women (they are at Southworke) come from 
beyond sea, called Quakers, and these swell, shiver, and shake, 
and when they come to themselves (for in all this fitt Mahomet's 
holy-ghost hath bin conversing with them) they begin to preache 
what hath been delivered to them by the spirit." Clarendon 
Mss., No. 2624. " It thus seems probable that Bennet merely 
employed a term already familiar, and quite appropriate as des- 
criptive of Fox's earUer adherents." This may be so, but it 
hardly seems likely that Justice Bennet should have been 
" familiar " with this small body in South London, whose ex- 
istence was unknown until recently, and who are not mentioned 
under this name except in the single manuscript quoted above. 

2 There is no doubt that meanings have been attributed to this 
phrase widely different from that held by Fox. He says : *' I 
turned the people to the divine light, which Christ, the heavenly 
and spiritual man, enlighteneth them withal ; that with that light 
they might see their sins, and that they were in death and dark- 
ness, and without God iu the world ; and that with the same light 
they might also see Christ, from whom it comes, their Saviour 
and Redeemer, who shed his blood and died for them, and who 
is the way to God, the truth, and the life." (" Journal," p. 168.) 
The phrase " Inner Light " is not used by Fox, or by the early 
friends so far as known. They said " the Light of Christ " 
(Sewel, 56, 95, etc.) or simply the " Light." For Isaac Pening- 
ton's view, see his W^orks. 2d ed., London, 1761, vol. i, pp. 
xxxviii, xxxix. For a modern discussion, see Rufus M. Jones, 
" Spiritual Law in the Social World," Philadelphia, 1904, pp. 
159-176. 



Beginning in England. 43 

trary to the words of Christ, " Swear not at all ; '* 
against tithes, as being also contrary to the gospel, 
whose ministers were to freely give what they had 
freely received ; against all language which de- 
parted from verbal truthfulness, such as titles 
of compliment ; ^ the use of the plural form of 
the pronouns in address ; of refusing to uncover 
the head to any man, regarding the act as one 
of worship, and to be practiced only toward 
God.'^ 

It was the practice in those times to make a 
difference in the manner of speaking to equals 
and to superiors. ** Thou '* and ** thee *' were used 
to the former and to inferiors, but *' you '* to 
superiors. It seemed to many at the time, as well 
as at a later day, that Fox attached too much 
importance to language and to the hat, but it is 
difficult to judge correctly without an accurate 
knowledge of the period. The principle involved 
was right, and having accepted that, he carried it 
to its logical conclusion. The practice of calling 
the days and months by their numerical names 

1 Legal dona fide titles, as king, duke, justice, etc., were ex- 
cepted. 

2 This fact explains the tenacity \\dth which the early Friends 
held to this testimony, believing that to take off the hat was 
giving the honor to men which was due to God only. (Fox's 
*' Journal," p. 179, and many other places.) " There was nothing 
which brought more abuse on these scrupulous reformers. In 
vain they explained that they did not mean it disrespectfully. 
Many were hurried away and cast into prison for contempt of 
court without any other crime being proved against them." (M. 
Webb, Fells of Swarthmoor Hall, pp. 31, 32.) See also W. 
James, *' Varieties of Religious Experience," New York, 1902, 
pp. 291-296. 



44 The Friends. 

was not original with him, it was a custom among 
the early Baptists as well. As to dress, there is 
absolutely nothing to show that Fox advised any- 
thing but simplicity ; uniformity he does not hint 
at ; that was the product of a later age. His 
"leather breeches *' have become famous through 
Carlyle,^ but there is no authority whatever for 
the statement that he stitched them himself, and 
the material seems to have been chosen for its 
wearing qualities alone.^ He himself bought for 
his wife a piece of red cloth for a mantle.^ 

In addition to those already mentioned, was the 
testimony against all war as contrary to the Gos- 
pel. Fox took this position, as early as 1650: he 
says, ** I lived in the virtue of that life and power 
that took away the occasion of all wars." And 
in 1654 in a letter to Cromwell, "I was set of 
God to stand a witness against all violence, and 
against the works of darkness ; and to turn people 
from darkness to light, and to bring them from 
the causes of war and fighting to the peaceable 
Gospel." * 

The views of Fox spread, and thousands flocked,* 
to hear and to accept the comforting doctrines 
proclaimed by these earnest men and women. 

1 " Sartor Resartus," book iii., chap. i. 

2 Sewel, p. 12. 

3 ]vx. Webb, Fells of Swarthmoor Hall, p. 259. See also 
" Epistles," vol. I, p. 55 ; William Thistlethwaite, " Lectures on 
the Rise and Progress of Friends," London, 1865, pp. 126-133. 

* " Journal," pp. 46, 137, 285, 630. 

^ Thurloe, " State Papers," vol. v., p. 166 ; vol. viii., pp. 403, 
427, etc. 



Beginning in England. 45 

Fox's acceptance of the universality of the gospel, 
and of the direct visitation of every soul by the 
Holy Spirit, logically brought him to see that 
women could not be excepted from any part of 
the divine commission/ Though the number of 
women who preached was somewhat less than that 
of men, those that preached took an active part in 
the work at home and abroad, and were full par- 
takers, even to death, in the sufferings of the early 
days. Their contributions to the literature were 
considerable. Altogether, women held a higher 
place than in any contemporary church organiza- 
tion. 

The early meetings for worship which sprang 
up all over the kingdom appear to have been con- 
gregational at first, and the beginnings of organi- 
zation were strikingly like the apostolic practice. 
Fox, in 1652, thus writes to Friends: " Be faithful 
to God, and mind that which is committed to you, 
as faithful servants, laboring in love; some thresh- 
ing and some plowing, and some to keep the sheep : 
he that can receive this, let him ; and all to watch 
over one another in the Spirit of God.*' ^ This 
was Fox's ideal meeting, and the whole organiza- 

1 One of the first if not the very first of Fox's converts was 
Elizabeth Hooton, who was also the first preacher after Fox. 
(Bowden, vol. i, p. 261). Fox's statement of his views on the 
position of women in a letter to the Duke of Holstein is re- 
markably clear and convincing. (" Journal," pp. 523 ff.) Fox 
did not, however, introduce women's preaching into the modem 
church. Edwards, in his '* Gangrsena," mentions the fact of 
women's preaching more than once. (See part i., pp. 26, 113, 
London, 1646.^ 

2 Fox's "Epistles," Epistles 16, London, 169S, p. 15. 



46 The Friends. 

tion afterward developed by him is based on the 
principle involved in these words. Like the early 
church, one of the first objects was the care of the 
poor, ** and to see that all walked according to 
truth." ^ 

1 " Letters, etc.," of " Early Friends," p. 311. 

Note. — The admirable little book by T. Edmund Harvey, 
" The Rise of the Quakers," London, 1905, has come to hand 
too late to be made much use of. 



CHAPTER IL 
discipivin:© and doctrine. 

AS numbers increased, necessity for some for- 
mal organization plan naturally suggested it- 
self, though from the first, as Fox*s ** Epistles *' 
and those of other Friends clearly show, the spirit 
of order and discipline was always present and car- 
ried out, though informally. Individual monthly 
meetings for discipline were set up, certainly as early 
as 1653, in Durham, and elsewhere in the northern 
counties,^ but the practice was occasional. Among 
the earliest held were *' general meetings," which 
were held for discussion, for advice, and to take 
into consideration all matters of common interest. 
The first of which any record remains was held at 
Swanington, Leicestershire, 1654; another was at 
Balby, Yorkshire, in 1656, which issued a number 
of directions and advices ; and from this time such 
meetings were held frequently. In 1660 Fox 
mentions a meeting at Skipton *' for business rela- 
ting to the church both in this nation and beyond 
the seas.*' He states also *^ this meeting had stood 

1 Fox's "Journal," pp. 310, 321, 419; " Letters, etc.," pp. 283, 
286, 311 ff. ; " Epistles from Yearly Meeting of Friends held in 
London,'* etc., Historical Introduction, London, 1858, vol. i., pp. 
vii. ff. " First Publishers of Truth," London, 1904, 1905. 

47 



48 The Friends. 

for several years, and part of the business was to 
consider the cases of those who had suffered for 
truth's sake, arid to help the poor.*' ^ 

Quarterly meetings were established contempo- 
raneously with monthly meetings, and for similar 
purposes. The quarterly meeting of the present 
day was a later development. 

Even in 1666, though there were many meetings 
for discipline, some even in America,^ it still was 
not a general practice. The occasion for the setting 
up of so many meetings of discipline is one of the 
most curious episodes in the history of the Society. 
George Fox had been in prison most of the 
time for three years, and during this period, miss- 
ing the restraint of his personal presence and the 
guidance of his sound judgment, not a few Friends 
had run into extremes. One of the most radical 
was John Perrot, a preacher who had been very 
active, ** and though little in person, yet great in 
opinion of himself ; nothing less would serve him 
than to go and convert the Pope.*' ^ Perrot on 
reaching Rome was confined as a madman. After 
great difficulty his release was secured. On his 
return to England his eccentricities were great, 
but the sufferings he had undergone gave him 
position, and his ability in speaking gained him 
adherents. He taught that " unless they had an 
immediate motion at that time to put it off/' the 

1 " Journal," p. 215 ; Sewel, p. 93. 

2 Bowden, vol. i., p. 208. 

3 " History of the Life of Thomas Ell wood " (an autobiogra- 
phy), London, 17 14, p. 241. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 49 

hat should be kept on in time of public prayer, 
both by the one praying and by those worshiping 
with him. This teaching spread ; some very 
prominent Friends being temporarily led away by 
it to a greater or less degree, among them Isaac 
Penington, Thomas EUwood, and John Crook.^ 

To Fox, who was a most reverent man, this 
teaching was abhorrent ; ^ he speaks of Perrot's fol- 
lowers as those who *' had run out from the truth/* 
He held several meetings with them "which lasted 
whole days,*' and reclaimed a number who, Thomas 
Ellwood says, with great simplicity and humility 
of mind acknowledged their *' outgoing '' and took 
condemnation and shame to themselves.^ 

Fox's good sense saw something must be done 
to avoid, as far as possible, such schisms in the 
future. EUwood's statement is so clear that it 
deserves to be quoted : '* Not long after this, 
G.[eorge] F.[ox] was moved of the Lord to travel 
through the countries, from county to county, to 
advise and encourage Friends to set up monthly 

1 In the MS. Records of Virginia Yearly Meeting there is a copy 
of a letter from Isaac Penington expressing sorrow at his being 
partly led away, and asking the Virginia P^riends to give up or 
destroy certain papers " written by me in time of great darkness 
and temptation." He also says : " It was God's mercy that he 
[John Perrot] did me no more hurt than he did ; and for that of 
the hat, I did not practice it myself nor desire that others should 
practice it, but only that the tender-hearted might be borne with 
in that respect." Dated "London, the 29 of the 3rd mo. [May] 
1675." There is a letter of the same date from John Crook very 
much to the same effect, and speaking of *' a paper writ by me 
about 12 years since." Virginia Yearly Meeting of Friends, MS. 
Minutes, " 28 of 8th month [October] 1675." 

2 Fox^s " Epistles," 251-253. 

8 Fox's "Journal," p. 310; Ellwood's " Autobiography," p. 244. 



50 The Friends. 

and quarterly meetings, for the better ordering 
the affairs of the church ; in taking care of the 
poor ; and exercising a true gospel discipline for 
a due dealing with any that might walk disorderly 
under our name ; and to see that such as should 
marry among us did act fairly and clearly in that 
respect/* ^ To these functions might be added : 
recording the sufTerings of Friends, and extending 
aid to those in prison and to their families ; keep- 
ing records of births, marriages, and deaths ; and 
other minor matters. 

The admirable system of meetings and records 
thus instituted by Fox has lasted with little altera- 
tion to the present day. Fox's practical mind is 
well illustrated on this journey by his advising 
Friends at Waltham to set " up a school there 
for teaching boys, and also a women's school at 
Shacklewel for instructing girls and young maidens 
in whatsoever things were civil and useful in the 
creation.*'^ His efforts were not confined to 
England, but he wrote to Scotland, Holland, Bar- 
badoes, and other parts of America advising the 
same course. Thus it is seen that not only was 
Fox a founder but a skillful organizer; He did 
not accomplish this work without opposition. 
Two well-known ministers, John Wilkinson and 



^ " Autobiography," p. 245 ; Fox's own account, " Journal," 
pp. 310 ff. 

2 " Journal," p. 316. See also his " Instruction for Right 
Spelling, Reading and Writing," or " Spelling Book," so-called, 
prepared in connection with Ellis Hookes, London, 1673, several 
times reprinted. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 51 

John Story, opposed him, partly, Sewel says, 
from envy, and partly because things were not 
ordered as they wished. The ground taken by 
them was, ** that every one ought to be guided 
by the Spirit of God in his own mind, and not 
to be governed by rules of man/' They were 
also opposed to women's meetings. They gath- 
ered a number of adherents, and at one time 
threatened much trouble ; but, in Sewel's quaint 
words, ** at length they decayed and vanished, as 
snow in the fields." ^ 

At first all meetings for discipline were " men's 
meetings" ; but Fox soon saw the advantage of 
women's meetings also, as being better adapted for 
looking after the members of their own sex, "and 
especially in that particular of visiting the sick 
and the weak, and looking after the poor widows 
and fatherless."^ 

Fox wrote many epistles to individuals and to 
meetings regarding good order in the church, 
dwelling on the necessity for Christian love and 
practice. To write epistles was a very common 
thing both for meetings and individuals to do, 
and valuable collections have been made of such.^ 

The first Yearly Meeting held in London ap- 

1 Sewel, p. 561 ; also " Journal " of Charles Marshall, London, 
1844, p. 26; ** Journal of P>iends' Historical Society," vol. i, pp. 
57 £f., London, 1904; Thomas Hodgkin, "George Fox," London 
and Boston, 1896, pp. 248-250; John S. Rowntree, " Micah's 
Mother," London, 1893. The controversy lasted thirty-six years. 

2 " Letters, etc.," pp. 293, 309, 343 ; Fox's " Journal," p. 386 ; 
William Crouch, " Posthuma Christiana," London, 1712, p. 22. 

3 " Letters, etc.," 1657, 1659, 1662, i666, pp. 287-318. Fox's 
" Epistles," 359, 361-389. 



52 The Friends. 

pears to have been in 1661, and these meetings 
were continued with occasional intermissions. 
The first Representative Yearly Meeting was held 
in 1673. In the next four years ** Public Friends " 
(ministers) only attended, but from 1678 to the 
present time there has been no intermission in the 
annual sessions of Representative Yearly Meet- 
ings.^ In 1905 the Yearly Meeting met in Leeds, 
Yorkshire, the first time it has met outside of 
London since 1671. In 1668, it is likely that the 
most formal document prepared up to that date 
was issued. This is often known as the '^ Canons 
and Institutions,*' and there seems little doubt 
that Fox was the author, as it bears his signature. 
This document was practically the Discipline of 
the Society for a long time. R. Barclay, in his 
'' Inner Life '' says that it is found at the com- 
mencement of the records of every quarterly 
meeting which had been hitherto inspected by 
him bearing date 1669. The writer of the present 
sketch found it in the beginning of the Virginia 
Records, which state that they were begun " in 
the year 1673 by the motion and order of George 

^ The Yearly Meeting held at London appears to be the con- 
tinuation of that held at Skipton beginning in 1656. Several were 
held at London from time to time, but it was not until 1671 that 
Yearly Meetings were regularly held in London. They have con- 
tinued to be held annually without interruption ever since. 
" Letters," pp. 311-317; "Epistles," i, pp. vii. ff. ; W. Beck and 
T. F. Ball, "The London Friends' Meetings," London, 1869, pp. 
53 ff. ; " Journal of The Friends' Historical Society," London, 
1905, vol. 2, pp. 59-63. It should be noted that in the earlier 
years, perhaps indeed as late as 1700, the term " Yearly Meeting " 
did not necessarily imply a meeting for business. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 53 

Fox, the servant of God/* There are nineteen 
different heads, under which are grouped appro- 
priately advices and regulations concerning almost 
all matters which would be likely to come up be- 
fore a church organization. They largely relate 
to matters of practical morality and Christian 
oversight and care/ The title *^ Canons and In- 
stitutions,*' was formally disclaimed by the 
Friends in 1675. 

No document exactly answering to a creed has 
ever been put forth by the Society as a whole, 
though a number of declarations of faith have 
been issued from time to time; but these have 
been rather for the benefit of outsiders, or in 
answer to charges preferred, than for the mem- 
bers of Society. One of the earliest formal state- 
ments was that made by Edward Burrough in 
1658/ John Crook in 1662 published " Truth's 
Principles," avowedly a statement of the doc- 
trines held by the Friends.^ Another statement 

1 The document is printed in full in " The London Friends' 
Meetings," by William Beck and T. Frederick Ball, London, 
1869, pp. 47 ff . ; also in substance by R. Barclay, "Inner Life,'* 

P- 395- 

2 " A declaration to all the World of Our Faith," etc., works of 
Edward Burrough, 1672, pp. 439 ff. " The Design of Christ- 
ianity," etc., John Crook, London, 1701, pp. 355 ff. 

^ " Truth's Principles, or those Things about Doctrine and 
Worship which are most surely believed and received amongst 
the People of God, called Quakers," etc., London, printed in the 
year 1662. This little book was reprinted at least sixteen times 
previous to 1803, and was translated into French and Welsh. 
John Crook's note to the edition of 1699 is interesting. In it he 
says, speaking of objectors : " They persist to object that we 
have altered our religion and that our ancient Friends held 
grievous errors ; I am therefore willing in the eighty-first year of 
my age that the following treatise should be reprinted, that they 



54 The Friends. 

in 1671, was addressed by George Fox and 
his companions, while in the island of Barbadoes, 
to the governor of that island. This is so com- 
prehensive that it has been quoted and referred 
to by the Society more than any similar docu- 
ment. As it is a defense against " false and 
scandalous reports," more stress is laid upon those 
points which Friends had in common with other 
Christian bodies than those in which they differ ; ^ 
in fact some of the fundamental principles of 
Friends are untouched ; for instance, that of the 
immediate communication of the will of God. 

The earliest formal statement by the Society 
was a document put forth in 1693. This action 
was due to the charges preferred by George 
Keith, who, after having been a prominent mem- 
ber, left the Society and became one of its bitter- 
est enemies,' and ** charged the Quakers with a 
belief which they never had owned to be theirs, 
[and] they found themselves obliged publicly to 
set forth their faith anew in print which they had 
often before asserted both in words and writing, 
thereby to manifest that their belief was really 
orthodox, and agreeable, with the Holy Script- 
ures.**^ This document remains one of the best 

may see what myself with our ancient Friends, held in the year 
1603. This little book is also reprinted in " Friends' Library," 
Philadelphia, vol. 13, pp. 275-292. 

1 " Journal," pp. 357-361 ; " Christian Discipline," pp. 2-6 ; 
and in the Disciplines of all the Yearly Meetings up to 1900. 

2 See chapter iii., Pennsylvania. 

^ Sewel, pp. 618-625, who gives the document in full. It has 
been repiinted in part in most of the Disciplines of the Yearly 
Meetings. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 55 

statements of the Quaker faith. It was probably 
the work to a large extent of George Whitehead, 
who nearly forty years before was one of George 
Fox*s band of sixty ministers. The widely 
known ** Apology '* of Robert Barclay, though 
published in 1678,* was not regarded as an official 
statement, neither was it specially referred to by 
the Friends of the seventeenth century. 

The main points of the teaching of Friends 
must be gathered from various documents issued 
at various times. Accepting the ordinary funda- 
mental doctrines of Christianity, they differed 
from other denominations in several important 
respects,^ which may be grouped under the fol- 
lowing heads : (i) The importance attached to 
the immediate personal teaching of the Holy 
Spirit or " Light within,** or " Inner Light — this 
lay at the root of most of their ** testimonies '* ; 
(2) The disuse of all types and outward ordi- 
nances ; (3) The manner of worship and of ap- 
pointment of ministers ; (4) The manner of 

* Originally published in Latin under the title " Theologiae 
vere Christianas Apologia," Amstelodami, 1676, but afterward 
translated by the author into English, as *' An Apology for the 
True Christian Divinity," 1678, and reprinted many times. It has 
not been sufficiently noted that Barclay's celebrated book is 
really an answer to the Westminster Confession and the Shorter 
Catechism. A comparison of the " Apology " with the " Cate- 
chism " will show the connection. 

^ These differences were far greater in the Seventeenth and 
Eighteenth centuries than at present, not only in doctrine but in 
practice; e.g., the liberty to decline to take judicial oaths, which 
privilege the Friend died to uphold. Through his efforts this is 
now the right of every one in America, and also in England of all 
who can show that they have conscientious scruples against 
taking an oath. 



56 The Friends. 

carrying into daily life and practice the com- 
mands of Christ. 

Their teachings in regard to the Spirit and in 
regard to oaths, dress, and language have been 
sufficiently indicated in the preceding pages. In 
disusing the ordinances of Baptism and the Supper, 
they believed, first, that there was no command 
for their continuance ; and secondly, that as the 
spiritual baptism and spiritual communion were 
essential there was no need for the outward sign ; 
and they also held that the use of the type tended 
to beget reliance upon the type. Dependence 
upon the immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit 
led the Friends to meet for divine worship in 
outward silence, as it was only under such cir- 
cumstances that the Holy Spirit could call for what 
service he would, and from whomsoever he would. 
They believed that nothing should come between 
the soul and God but Christ, and that to make the 
worship of a whole congregation depend upon 
the presence or absence of one man was contrary 
to the idea of true worship. Ministers, they 
held, were called and qualified of God, and so the 
exercise of their gifts was not to be dependent 
upon education or upon any special training ; ^ 
that the gift of the ministry was bestowed upon 
men and women alike. They believed in carry- 
ing gospel precepts into daily life more than most 

^ Education was not undervalued, but highly esteemed, as has 
been seen in George Fox's recommending the establishment of 
schools ; but this was for all persons alike. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 57 

of their contemporaries, and all their dealings 
were to be in strict accord with their religious 
profession. War, as has been said, they held, 
was clearly antagonistic to the commands of 
Christ, and contrary to the whole tenor of a 
gospel of love and peace. 

Their views in regard to the Holy Scriptures 
have been much misunderstood. This has been 
due partly to the way in which they often ex- 
pressed their views, and partly from readers not 
paying due attention to the context, from not 
examining other writings, or from being ignorant 
of the real practice of the early Friends. George 
Fox **had an extraordinary gift in opening the 
Scriptures *' ^ and it is well known he carried a 
Bible with him ; few persons have been more 
familiar with the Bible than he, or been able to 
make a more ready use of it, as his Journal 
abundantly testifies. The Bible which he gave to 
Swarthmoor meeting is still preserved in Swarth- 
moor Meeting-house. Samuel Bownas at times 
preached with his Bible in his hand.* The ex- 
treme literalism of the age led the early Friends 
to make use of language to which their antagonists 
gave meanings often quite foreign to the real 
facts. Barclay's words, " We shall also be very 
willing to admit it as a positive certain maxim, 
that whatsoever any do pretending to the Spirit, 



1 William Penn, Preface to Fox*s " Journal,'* see also Sewel, 
p. 12. 

2 " Life," pp. 7, 23, 100, London, 1795. 



58 



The Friends. 



which is contrary to the Scriptures, be accounted 
and reckoned a delusion of the devil/' are a fair 
statement of the general belief.^ 

Their views as to marriage and the marriage 
ceremony are peculiar, and were laid down by 
Fox himself as early as 1653.^ 

Marriage *' is God*s ordinance, and not man's,'* 
'* We marry none," ** we are but witnesses of it.*' * 
The man and the woman were to take themselves 
as man and wife in the presence of God's people ; 
the clearness from all other engagements being 
ascertained, and consent of parents and guardians 
obtained/ The Friends were faithful to this tes- 
timony ; ** to such an extent did the care respecting 

^ R. Barclay, " Apology/* Prop. III., § vi. It must be con- 
fessed that Barclay himself, when he terms the Scriptures a 
" secondary rule,'* uses language likely to convey a wrong im- 
pression. " It is not the Scriptures without the Spirit, nor the 
Spirit contrary to the Scriptures, but the Spirit's discovering the 
will of God in the heart, or opening of the Scriptures in its own 
time and way, and not in or by the will of man but as itself 
pleaseth .... which giveth the perfect sound and saving knowl- 
edge." John Crook, ** Truths Principles," London, 1662, p. 7. 

'^ "Journal," p. 315. ^ pvx's ** Epistles," p. 281. 

^ " And when they do go together, and take one another, let 
there not be less than a dozen friends and relations present (ac- 
cording to your usual order), having first acquainted the men's 
meetings, and they have clearness and unity with them, and that 
it may be recorded in a book." (" Canons and Constitutions," 
1668; "The London Friends' Meetings," p. 47; Virginia MS. 
Records, 1673.) '^^^ Friends' meetings before giving consent to 
a marriage were required to see that there was no existing en- 
gagement, that there was no legal obstruction, and that if there 
were children of a former marriage, that their rights should be 
carefully protected. (See also Fox's " Journal," p. 315 ; Sewel, 
p. 667 ; Penn's " Rise and Progress," 7th ed., London, 1769, pp. 
43 ff., also the Disciplines of the various Yearly Meetings.) At 
present, applications for permission to marry are made to monthly 
meetings, which appoint a committee to see if anything stands 
in the way, and on its report, if satisfactory, give permission. 



Discipline and Doctrine. 59 

marriages . . • prevail in the Society . . . 
that [in England] prior to 1790 the man had to 
attend twelve distinct meetings for discipline, to 
repeat in public his intention of marriage, and the 
intentions were announced twenty times prior to 
the solemnization of the marriage." ^ 

The Friends, with no boastful feeling, but with 
the desire that the record should stand as a testi- 
mony and as a memorial, directed that ** suffer- 
ings of Friends (of all kinds of sufferings) in all the 
countries be gathered up and put together and 
sent to the General Meeting, and so sent to Lon- 
don/* The result has been that a remarkable and 
detailed record of sufferings for conscience' sake 
has been preserved. " The severity and extent 
of their sufferings is shown by the fact that dur- 
ing the twenty-five years of Charles the Second*s 
reign I3<,562 Friends were imprisoned in various 
parts of England, 198 were transported as slaves 
beyond seas, 338 died in prison or of wounds re- 
ceived in violent assaults on their meetings.'* * 
This does not include those who suffered in 
America, among whom were four who were exe- 
cuted on Boston Common.* 

1 R. Barclay, " Inner Life," p. 407. 

2 William Beck, " The Friends," p. 65. 

3 Joseph Besse, in his " Collection of the Sufferings of the 
People called Quakers " (from 1650 to 16S9), used the records 
referred to above, and in his volumes (London, 1753), may be 
found the details, geographically and chronologically arranged, 
with full indices. It should be said that the sufferings of Friends 
did not cease with 1689, either in England or in America, but 
they were chiefly on account of refusal to pay tithes. Their suf- 
ferings in America will be referred to in the following chapter. 



6o The Friends. 

[Note. — The authority for the statements made in the text is 
to be found in " Christian Discipline," etc., London, 1883 ; the 
Disciplines of the various Yearly Meetings ; William C. West- 
lake, "The Sure Foundation," London, i860, pp. 11-36; Thomas 
P^vans, " Exposition of the Faith of the Society of Friends," 
Philadelphia, 1828 (frequently reprinted) ; William Penn, preface 
to Fox's " Journal," reprinted as " Rise and Progress of the 
People called Quakers," in many editions (Philadelphia, Friends* 
Book -store) ; R. Barclay, " Apology," " Friends* Library," vol. i, 
pp. 109-141, Philadelphia, 1837; John S. Rowntree, "Quakerism 
Past and Present," London, 1859; also his, " The Society of 
Friends, its Faith and Practice," London, 1901. See also, T. 
Edmund Harvey, "The Rise of the Quakers, "London, 1905.] 



CHAPTER III. 
^ARIVY Y:eARS IN AMERICA. 

[Note. — All dates before 1752 are Old Style.] 

OWING to the disorders in England, the colo- 
nists of Massachusetts Bay had increased 
rapidly in numbers by 1656. It would natu- 
rally be supposed that, having left England largely 
on account of religious persecution, they would be 
ready to establish religious liberty in their new 
home. Nothing was further from their thoughts. 
The express purpose of their coming was to do as 
they pleased in regard to religious matters. Stern 
and unbending opponents of toleration, one of 
their first acts was to send back two Episcopalians. 
Another episode was the banishment of Roger 
Williams. Scarcely were they clear of him, before 
Anne Hutchinson and the Antinomians rose up ; 
then the Anabaptists. " Fines, imprisonment, 
whipping, etc.,^ were brought into use to clear the 
colony of these dangerous heretics. If the colo- 
nists felt in this way toward those differing with 
them who had already appeared, it is not to be 
wondered at that they felt still more strongly in 

1 Neal, " New England,*' vol. i., p. 291. 
61 



62 The Friends. 

regard to the Quakers, against whom, however, 
there was in 1656 no law/ 

The first recorded visit of any Quakers in Massa- 
chusetts was that of two women, Ann Austin and 
Mary Fisher, who arrived in a vessel from Barba- 
does in the beginning of July, 1656. As soon as 
Richard Bellingham, the deputy-governor, heard 
of their arrival, he sent " officers aboard who 
searched their trunks and chests and took away 
the books they found there, which were about a 
hundred, and carried them ashore, after having 
commanded the said women to be kept prisoners 
aboard, and the said books were by an order of 
council burned in the market-place by the hang- 
man/* The women were then brought on shore, 
put in prison, all persons forbidden to speak to 
them under penalty of five pounds ; pens, ink, and 
paper were taken away from them, and a board 
nailed before the window that no one might see 
or speak to them. Worse than this, they were 
stripped perfectly nude and subjected to an out- 
rageous examination to see if they were witches. 
All this was done, it should be remembered, before 
trial and before there was any law against the 
Quakers. After an imprisonment of five weeks, 
during which they were cruelly treated, they 
were put on board the vessel and sent back to 
Barbadoes/ Two days after they left, a vessel 

^ Hutchinson, " Massachusetts," vol. i., p. 197. 

2 Sewel, p. 156; Bishop, " New England Judged, etc.," Lon- 
don, 1703, pp. 8 ff. ; Besse, vol. ii., pp. 177 ff. ; Bowden, vol. i., 
pp. 33 ff. ; Hallowell, "Quaker Invasion," pp. 32 ff . ; Brooks 



Early Years in America. 63 

arrived from London with eight of the hated sect 
on board. One can imagine the horror of the 
magistrates. The master of the vessel was forced 
to take them back to England/ 

It was while these were still in prison that the 
first law directly aimed against the Quakers was 
passed, strictly an ex post facto one so far as the 
prisoners were concerned. It is dated "Boston, 
14 of October, 1656.'' ^ It begins : ** Whereas, 
there is a cursed sect of heretics lately risen up in 
the world which are commonly called Quakers, 
who take upon them to be immediately sent of 
God and infallibly assisted by the Spirit to speak 
and write blasphemous opinions, despising govern- 
ment and the order of God in church and com- 
monwealth,'* etc. Heavy penalties were provided 
for the master of any vessel who might knowingly 
bring a Quaker into the colony, while any of the 
sect who might come from any direction were to 
be " forthwith committed to the house of correc- 
tion, and at their entrance to be severely whipped 
and by the master thereof, be kept constantly to 
work, and none suffered to converse or speak with 
them.'* Any person importing, concealing, etc., 

Adams, " Emancipation of Massachusetts," pp. 128 ff. ; George 
E. Ellis, " Memorial History of Boston," James R. Osgood & 
Co., Boston, 1882, vol. i., pp. 177 ff . ; G. E. Ellis, "The Puritan 
Age in Massachusetts Bay," Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 
1888, pp. 408 ff. (the last two are a defense of the Puritans) ; 
Bryant and Gay's '* History of the United States," Chas. Scrib- 
ner & Sons, New York, 1878, vol. ii., chap. viii. 

1 Hutchinson, " Massachusetts," vol. i., p. 197. 

2 Mass. Records, vol. iv., part i., pp. 277 ff. ; Hallowell, pp. 133 
£f. ; Basse, vol. ii., p. 179 ; Bowden, vol. i., p. 46, etc. 



64 The Friends. 

** Quaker books or writings concerning their 
devilish opinions," was to suffer heavy penalties 
likewise. 

Notwithstanding this law, the Quakers contin- 
ued to come, and on October 14, 1657, the second 
law against them was enacted, and severer penal- 
ties prescribed/ 

A third law, enacted May 19, 1658, forbade the 
Quakers holding meetings, those attending being 
fined ten shillings and those who might speak five 
pounds, with further penalties for old offenders. 
But this was not enough, for on October 19th of 
the same year, and May 22, 1661, it was provided 
that banished Quakers who might return were to 
suffer death. ^ Space does not allow a description 
of even one of the punishments inflicted under 
these laws ; suffice it to say that the laws were 
rigorously carried out, even to the hanging on 
Boston Common of three men and one woman. 
These cruelties, and particularly the executions, 
having been brought to the notice of Charles II., 
he issued the " King's Missive,*' which reached 
Boston shortly before the day fixed for the exe- 
cution of one of the sufferers, Wenlock Christison, 
and he and his fellow-prisoners to the number of 
twenty-seven were set at liberty.^ 



^ Mass. Records, vol. iv., part i., pp. 308 ff. 

2 Ibid.^ vol. iv., part ii., pp. 2» 321, 345. 

3 Bowden, vol. i., p. 226; Bishop, pp. 335 ff. ; Neal, vol. 1., p. 
314 ; Hallowell, " Quaker Invasion," pp. 55, 189-191 ; Basse, 
vol. i., preface, p. xxxii., and p. 225. See Whittier's poem, " The 
King*s Missive." 



Early Years in America. 65 

This action, however, only applied to the punish- 
ment of death, for a year later the laws, so far as 
whipping, e tc., were concerned, were re-enacted 
with but little modification. In May, 1681, the 
death penalty was formally repealed, and on March 
23, 1681-82, the laws were suspended/ There 
was no whipping after 1677, though Friends suf- 
fered imprisonment for their refusal to pay tithes, 
etc. Even the Plymouth colonists made use of 
whipping, disfranchisement, fines, banishment.' 
Friends were always ready to pay their share 
toward the expenses of the civil government, but 
they would not pay tithes.^ 

It may be said, as it has often been said, ** The 
Quakers brought all this suffering upon themselves; 
why did they * intrude * themselves where they 
were not wanted ? '* It may well be said in reply, 
Why should they have stayed away ? They were 
Englishmen, with all the rights of Englishmen. 
Wenlock Christison on his trial appealed to the 
laws of England, asking the pertinent question, 
" How have you power to make laws repugnant 



1 Mass. Records, vol. iv., part ii., pp. 4, 19, 34, 59, 88 ; vol. v., 
pp. 60, 134, 322. 

2 Bowden, vol. i., p. 294 ; MS. Records, Sandwich Monthly 
Meeting, " 8th mo., 2, 1674, 4th mo., 4, 1675, ^^^ ^^'^^•' ^/^S " 
(" Thos. Bowman in prison for priest's rates ") ; Bishop, pp. 164 
ff. ; Bowden, vol. i., pp. 75 ff. 

3 Hallowell, " Pioneer Quakers," p. 51 ; Sandwich Monthly 
Meeting Records, " 3d mo., 9, 1712." Two Friends report that 
they have found out the proportion between the priest's rates and 
towMi and county charge, " and the priest's part, which Friends 
cannot pay, is near about one half, lacking half a third of the 
whole," . 

s 



66 The Friends. 

to the laws of England?" and declaring that the 
patent had been forfeited. There is no doubt 
whatsoever that he was legally correct in claiming 
that his legal rights were violated/ 

Much has been made by Massachusetts his- 
torians and apologists of one or two women who 
divested themselves of the whole or part of their 
clothing, and then marched up and down the 
streets. Such apologists forget the age, and also 
that these acts were not done until after persecu- 
tion had goaded the sufferers into what seems to 
this century to be a most unseemly exhibition. 
But while there were only two or three such epi- 
sodes, the laws of Massachusetts, passed presum- 
ably after deliberation, directed that women should 
be ** stripped naked from the middle up, tied to a 
cart's tail, and whipped through the town and 
from thence '' to the next town and until they 
were conveyed out of ** our jurisdiction.** ^ This 
was done not once or twice, but again and again, 
most cruelly. It was a rude age, and both Friends 
and Puritans must be judged by the standards of 
the time in which they lived. The records, how- 



1 For a full statement see Hallowell's " Quaker Invasion " and 
*' Pioneer Quakers " ; Brooks Adams, " Emancipation of Massa- 
chusetts " ; Charles Francis Adams, '* Massachusetts, its His- 
torians and its History." The last author discusses in a trenchant 
manner the spirit of the Puritans. See also Bowden, vol. i., pp. 
243 ff. ; Bishop, p. 337. 

2 Mass. Records, vol. iv., part ii., p. 4 ; Hallowell, " Quaker In- 
vasion," p. 142 ; Besse, vol. ii., p. 227. George Fox and John 
Burnyeat, in their " New England's Fire-Brand Quenched," use 
this argument well, pp. 32, 184, 196, 197, 224. (Quoted in Hall- 
oweil.) 



Early Years in America. 67 

ever, show that the magistrates and church officers 
were the ones primarily responsible for the perse- 
cutions, for there is scarcely a single instance where 
the people at large manifested their approval of 
the cruelties practiced, while their disapproval was 
frequently shown/ 

It was not until 1724 that the Quakers received 
the reward of their long endurance. In 1723 some 
Friends were appointed assessors in Dartmouth 
and Tiverton, and being conscientiously scrupulous 
of assessing taxes for the support of the ministers 
of the churches, were cast into prison and fined. 
Having made ineffectual application to the co- 
lonial government, they appealed to the Royal 
Privy Council in England. This sustained them on 
all points, remitted the heavy fines imposed, and 
ordered their release after thirteen months* con- 
finement. This ** marks the collapse of the effort 
made by the Puritans to establish a theocracy in 
Massachusetts." ^ Laws exempting Anabaptists 
and Quakers from supporting the ministers were 
passed in 1728 and later. 

Notwithstanding the persecutions in New Eng- 
land, the Society grew in numbers, but particularly 
in Rhode Island, where under the liberal charter 

1 The defense of the magistrates is a curious document. Mass. 
Records, vol. iv., part ii., p. 386; vol. v., p. 198; Gough, vol. i., 
p. 393, who discusses it section by section. 

2 Gough, vol. iv., pp. 218-226, where papers are given in full, as 
also in Hallowell, " Pioneer Quakers," pp. 57-70; Brooks Adams, 
" Emancipation of Massachusetts," p. 321 ; " Acts and Resolves 
of the Province of Massachusetts Bay," Boston, 1814, vol. ii., p. 
494, etc. 



68 The Friends. 

and administration they found a safe refuge. As 
early as 1666 they were of sufficient strength in 
the colony to cause the General Assembly to re- 
fuse a proposition for enforcing an oath of allegi- 
ance, and in 1667 their views were regarded still 
more.^ Many of the influential men embraced 
Quaker doctrines, three of whom, Nicholas Easton, 
William Coddington, and Henry Bull, filled the 
office of governor. In 1672 the governor, deputy- 
governor, and magistrates were Friends, and the 
colony was largely if not wholly under their control. 
This circumstance was an extraordinary one not 
only in the history of the colonies but in the world, 
for it is doubtless the first example of any politi- 
cal community being ruled by men who believed 
strictly in the principles of peace. Nothing oc- 
curred to test their peace principles for some time : 
a law, however, was passed (1673) exempting from 
penalty those who had conscientious scruples 
against military service, but not relieving them 
from civil duties, and requiring all to aid in carry- 
ing out of danger women, children, and weak per- 
sons, also ** to watch to inform of danger.** In 
1675, however, their peace principles were severely 
tried. The colony was asked to join with the 
other New England colonies in preparing for the 
Indian War then impending, but she, the governor 
being William Coddington, declined to join in the 
war. This course was not pleasing to the majori- 
ty of the colonists of Providence Plantations. 

^ Bowden, vok i., p. 296. 



Early Years in America. 69 

Though the latter suffered, Warwick being burnt 
and Providence set on fire during the war, those 
on the island of Rhode Island escaped/ 

Sandwich, Massachusetts, monthly meeting 
seems to have been the first established in America,^ 
and Scituatewas estabHshed before 1660.^ There 
is no reason for doubting that a Yearly Meeting 
was regularly held on Rhode Island from 1661, 
when it was set up/ This makes New England 
Yearly Meeting as it was subsequently called, the 
oldest Yearly Meeting in the world, except that 
of London. 

It was in 1672 that Roger Williams made his 
proposal for a disputation with Friends ; but 
though Roger Williams speaks of George Fox 
slily departing, there is no reason to suppose that 
Fox had not left before the challenge reached 
Newport. Roger Williams engaged to maintain 
fourteen propositions in public against all comers. 
He was met in debate by John Burnyeat, William 
Edmundson, and John Stubs in the presence of a 
great crowd who were gathered in the Friend's 
Meeting- House/ Burnyeat rightly characterizes 



1 Bowden, vol. i., pp. 306 ff. ; Edmundson, pp. 76 ff. 

2 The records are preserved from 1672, the first entry being 
*' 4th mo. [June] 25, 1672." These were personally examined by 
the writer of the present sketch. 

^ " Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections," Second Series, vol, x. (see 
Duxbury) ; also Bowden, vol. i., pp. 207, 296. 

* Bishop, p. 35T. Burnyeat, p. 47, describes the meeting in 
1672. See also " Letters, etc.," p. 313; Fox, " Journal," p. 366 ; 
Bowden, vol. i., p. 280. 

^ Roger Williams, who was about sixty-five, rowed himself in 
an open boat to Newport, a distance of thirty miles. 



70 The Friends. 

the propositions as ** charges/* They may be 
judged from the following: *'2ly that ye Christ 
yt they profess is not ye true Lord Jesus Christ 
.... 4ly That they doe not owne ye holy Scrip- 
tures. . . . 61y That their Prinsipels : & profession 
are full of Contradictions and Hipocrisies.*'^ 

As Roger Williams speaks of Edmundson as 
** rude/* and Edmundson of him as " the bitter 
old man/* the dispute must have been a stirring 
one. Burnyeat says Roger Williams ** could not 
make any proof of his charges to the satisfaction 
of the auditory/* Three days were consumed at 
Newport, and one day at Providence, Edmundson 
and Stubs being the defenders there. Each side 
was satisfied that it had gained the victory. 
Williams clearly had the weaker side, as he really 
was very ignorant of the true views of the Society 
of Friends/ He was not silenced, however, for 
he wrote an account of the incident and defended 
himself in *' George Fox digged out of his Bur- 
rows,** styled by Fox " a very envious and wicked 
book.** ^ This was replied to by Fox and Burnyeat 
by "A New England Fire-Brand Quenched.** 



1 For Roger Williams's letter and complete list, see " Historical 
Magazine," New York, 1858, vol. ii., p. 56. 

2 Edmundson, pp. 64 ff. ; Burnyeat, p. 53 ; William Gammell, 
" Life of Roger Williams," Sparks's " American Biography," 
vol. iv., Boston, 1864, pp. 187-190; James D. Knowles, "Memoir 
of Roger Williams," Boston, Lincoln, Edwards & Co., 1834, p. 
338; O. S. Straus, " Roger Williams," New York, 1894, pp. 218- 
221, 

^ ** Journal," p. 432. Professor Gammell says that it is " dis- 
tinguished by a bitterness and severity unequaled in any other of 
his [Williams's] vrritings." (" Life," pp. 187-190.) 



Early Years in America. 71 

These two books are good examples of the lan- 
guage which even the religious men of the seven- 
teenth century allowed themselves to use.^ 

Connecticut followed the example of Massa- 
chusetts, and on the recommendation of the 
Council of the United Colonies the General Court 
of Hartford passed an act similar to that of Massa- 
chusetts, October 2, 1656; this was amended so as 
to be more effective against ** loathesome heretics, 
whether Quakers, Ranters, Adamites, or some 
other like them/* In 1658 corporal punishment 
was added.^ New Haven passed similar laws, and 
executed them more severely. Humphrey Nor- 
ton, in 1657, being imprisoned was put into the 
stocks, flogged on his bare back till the bystanders 
through their strong expressions of disapproval 
stopped it ; he was then branded deeply on his 
right hand with the letter H, signifying heresy, 
and sent back until his fines were paid, which was 
done by a perfect stranger, a Dutchman, out of 
compassion ;^ and Norton was banished in addi- 
tion. Other instances of persecution took place, 
but none so severe.* Connecticut and New Haven 
never were fruitful fields for Quaker missionaries. 

^ Both books are rare ; Williams's has, however, been re- 
printed. " Burrow's " in the punning title refers to Edward 
Burrough, Fox's able coadjutor. An account of the incident will 
be found in Henry M. Dexter's "As to Roger Williams," Bos- 
ton, 1876, but the author all through the book is very unfair 
tow^ard the Quakers. See Hallowell's " Invasion," pp. 6i, 73-75. 

2 " Colonial Records of Connecticut," J. H. Trumbull, Hart- 
ford, 1850, pp. 283, 303, 324. 

3 Besse, vol. iL, p. 196; Bishop, p. 203. 

* Burnyeat, pp. 54-58 ; Edmundson, pp. 82 ff. 



72 The Friends. 

The first Friends in New York appear to have 
been on Long Island, and to have come from Massa* 
chusetts and Connecticut. Long Island, at least 
as far as Oyster Bay, was under the jurisdiction of 
the Dutch. Gravesend was settled almost wholly 
by the English, some of them Anabaptists, and 
others refugees from the intolerance of Massachu- 
setts. One of the most prominent was a Lady 
Moody, who joined the Friends and had a meet- 
ing at her house.^ 

The first Friends who visited New Amsterdam 
(New York) were Robert Hodgson and four com- 
panions, three being women, who landed in August, 
1657. At first they were courteously treated by 
Stuyvesant, the governor, but afterward two of the 
women, who had held a meeting in the street, 
were arrested, cast into prison, and finally put on 
board a vessel bound for Rhode Island. Robert 
Hodgson went on to Gravesend, where he was 
arrested and, with two women who had entertained 
him, brought back to New Amsterdam. The 
women, who were very roughly treated, were dis- 
charged, but Hodgson was sentenced to work 
two years at a wheelbarrow with a negro, or pay 
a fine of six hundred guilders. He refused to do 
either, and was most barbarously treated. Finally 
he was released at the intercession of the sister 
of Stuyvesant, without paying a fine or working.^ 

1 Croese, part ii., p. 157. 

2 Bishop, pp. 213 k. ; Whiting, "Truth and Innocence," p; 121 
(bound with Bishop) ; John Romeyn Brodhead, " History of the 
State of New York," New York, Harper & Brothers, 2d ed., vol. 



Early Years in America. 73 

Persecution was not confined to visitors. Inhab- 
itants of Long Island were subjected to heavy 
fines, imprisonment, forfeiture of goods, and ban- 
ishment. The severe punishments ended sooner in 
the New Netherlands than in Massachusetts, for 
on April 16, 1663, the enlightened Directors at 
Amsterdam a few weeks after the arrival in Hol- 
land of John Bowne, a banished Friend, not only 
gave him permission to return, but sent a letter to 
Stuyvesant breathing the true spirit of toleration. 
Among other things they said : '* We very much 
doubt if vigorous proceedings against them [the 
Quakers] ought not to be discontinued except you 
intend to check and destroy your population, which, 
however, in the youth of your existence ought 
rather to be encouraged by all possible means. . . . 
The consciences of men, at least, ought ever to re- 
main free and unshackled. Let every one be un- 
molested as long as he is modest ; as long as his 
conduct in a political sense is irreproachable, as 
long as he does not disturb others or oppose the 
government. This maxim of moderation has al- 
ways been the guide of the magistrates of this 
city, and the consequence has been that, from 
every land, people have flocked to this asylum. 
Tread thus in their steps, and, we doubt not, you 
will be blessed.*' ^ 

i., pp. 636 ff. ; Bryant and Gay, " History of the United States," 
vol. ii., pp. 239 ff. 

1 Bowden, vol. i., pp. 309-326; Croese, book ii., p. 157; Bishop, 
pp. 213 ff., 422 ff. ; Besse, vol. ii., pp. 182, 237 ; Brodhead, vol. i., 
pp. 705-707. 



74 The Friends. 

Friends Increased rapidly on Long Island, and 
were visited by many traveling ministers, some of 
whom suffered much/ John Burnyeat came in 
1666 and again in 1671, when he says he** was 
with them at their Half-Year's Meeting at Oyster 
Bay ; '* at the second Half-Year's Meeting, at the 
same place, " in the meeting for business " he 
found those who ** rose in a wrong spirit against 
the blessed order of the truth. . . . And chiefly 
their envy and bitterness was against George Fox 
and his papers of wholesome advice, which he in 
the love of God had sent among Friends." 
Burnyeat was successful, before he left, in satisfy, 
ing ** Friends in general *' of the errors of these 
people.^ This is the first meeting for discipline 
in New York of which there is any record, though 
Burnyeat's account clearly implies such meetings 
were nothing new.^ 

But the most important visit was that of George 
Fox himself, who, on his way from Maryland to 
New England, attended the Half-Year's Meeting 
at Oyster Bay. In company with him were John 
Burnyeat, Robert Widders, and George Pattison. 
This was the spring of 1672. The meeting. Fox 
says, lasted four days, beginning on the First day 
of the week. ** The first and second days we had 
publick meetings for worship, to which the people 

1 Bishop, p. 424. 

2 Burnyeat, pp. 35, 40-42. The opposition was due to John 
Parrot's influence. Bowden, vol. i., p. 329, 

3 The first official records yet found read : " At a men's meeting 
the 23rd day of 3rd month [May] 1671." 



Early Years in America. 75 

of the world of all sorts might and did come. On 
the third day of the week were the men's and 
women's meetings, wherein the affairs of the 
church were taken care of. Here we met some 
of the bad spirit, who were run out from truth 
into prejudice, contention, and opposition to the 
order of truth and to Friends therein." He would 
not allow the disputes to come up in the regular 
meetings, but appointed a special meeting for the 
" discontented,*' '* where as many Friends as had 
a desire were present also.'* " The gainsayers " 
were confounded, and ** some of those that had 
been chief . . . began to fawn upon me and to 
cast the matter upon others." The force of the 
schism was ended.^ 

After his visit to Rhode Island and other places 
in New England, already referred to, Fox returned 
to Long Island in the sixth month (August), and 
held a number of meetings at Oyster Bay, at 
" Rye on the Continent," at Flushing, and at 
Gravesend. 

William Edmundson, who visited Long Island 
a second time in 1676, found Friends troubled 
with ** Ranters — i.e., men and women who would 
come into Friends' meetings singing and dancing 
in a rude manner, which was a great exercise to 
Friends." He remained some time, and says he 
reclaimed many.^ 

1 " Journal/' pp. 365, 366. Burnyeat names the " chief," and 
proved it " under his own hand," p. 46. Bowden, vol. i., pp. 
329 ff. 

2 " Journal," p. 94. These " Ranters " may be the ones referred 



76 The Friends. 

The objection of Friends to oaths, and military 
service, and also their method of solemnizing mar- 
riages brought upon them fines, distraints, impris- 
onment, disfranchisement, and disqualification for 
holding office.^ 

The meetings in Westchester County were 
settled from Long Island, and as early as 1686 a 
Quarterly Meeting was held at Westchester. 

By a minute of New England Yearly Meeting 
14th of 4 mo., June 1695, a *' general meeting'' 
was authorized to be held at Flushing, Long 
Lsland. From that time to the present New York 
Yearly Meeting has been regularly held.^ The 
Friends must have increased rapidly, for on Febru- 
ary 22, 1687, Governor Dongan reports **an abun- 
dance of Quaker preachers, men and women.** ^ 

The first Friend who visited Virginia was Eliza- 
beth Harris, who must have come in 1656, possibly 
in 1655. She appears to have persuaded a num- 
ber to embrace her views. In 1657 Josiah Coale 

to in a petition from the inhabitants of Huntington, L. I., 1677, 
against Quakers who disturbed public worship. " Documentary 
History of New York," vol. iii., p. 209. 

1 *' Documentary History of New York," vol. iii., pp. 603-612 ; 
*' Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New York," 
Albany, 1856, vol. iii., p. 415; vol. v., pp. 978, 983, 984. 

2 First known as " the Yearly Meeting held at Flushing," then 
as New York Yearly Meeting. It was held at Flushing until 
1777, then at Westbury until 1793, when it v/as adjourned to be 
held in New^ York City. The first regular meeting for worship in 
New York City w^as probably in 1681. A house may have been 
built in 1698, but it is doubtful ; one was built in 1774. James 
Wood, address *' Bi-Centennial Anniversary of New York Yearly 
Meeting," New York, 1895, PP- 7~2>^ 5 ^^^^ ^^ " American Friend," 
vol. 2, pp. S51 ff. 

^ "Documentary History of New York," vol. i., p. 116. 



Early Years in America. 77 

and Thomas Thurston came on their way to New 
England. Their coming created an uproar ; they 
were thrown into prison, and, when released, re- 
quired to leave the country. In 1658 an act ban- 
ishing the Quakers was passed. In 1661, after 
the restoration, of Charles II. an act was passed 
requiring all persons to contribute to the support 
of the established (Episcopal) church. Friends 
were to be fined twenty pounds per month for ab- 
sence from church, and their own meetings were 
forbidden under heavy penalties. In 1662 all who 
refused to have their children baptized were to be 
*' amerced two thousand pounds ; half to the in- 
former, half to the public.'* In 1663 the Quakers 
were specially named : it provided " that if any 
Separatists above the age of sixteen years to the 
number of five or more assembled at any time 
and at any place to worship not according to the 
laws of England," they were to be fined for the 
first and second offense, but to be banished for the 
third. Masters of vessels and those entertaining 
Quakers were to be heavily fined.^ 

The Episcopalians in Virginia seemed desirous 
of rivaling the Puritans and the Dutch in persecu- 
tion, but there are fewer instances of personal 
cruelty. One was that of George Wilson, who, 
after being severely whipped, was confined in a 
loathsome dungeon in Jamestown, where, ** in 

1 Neill, " Virginia Carolorum," pp. 252, 292 ff. ; Bancroft, 
" United States " (last revision), vol. i., p. 44S ; Bowden, vol. i., 
PP- 339 ff. 



78 The Friends. 

cruel irons which rotted his flesh," after a long 
imprisonment he laid down his life/ 

The Society of Friends in Virginia was not 
only troubled from without but also from within. 
Nowhere, perhaps, in America was the schism of 
John Perrot so strong. He had gone to the West 
Indies and America to propagate his views, and 
had visited Virginia. Many were attracted by his 
teachings and led away, so that some did not meet 
together in a meeting once a year, and ** were be- 
come loose and careless.'* At the height of this 
movement John Burnyeat visited the colony, 
1665-66, and earnestly labored for the restoration 
of the erring. He was very successful in his 
mission.* 

Burnyeat*s efforts were ably seconded by 
William Edmundson, who arrived soon after the 
former's departure. During his visit he went to 
see Governor Berkeley, whose brother he had 
known in Ireland ; but the governor was '* peevish 
and brittle.** Some one told Edmundson, however, 
that the governor must have been in a good 
humor, as he had not called him '* dog, rogue, 
etc.*' ' 

In November, 1672, George Fox and four com- 
panions on their return from New England 
visited Virginia, and held many large meetings, 
setting up meetings for discipline, and confirming 
and extending the work of Burnyeat and Edmund- 

1 Bishop, p. 3i;i. 2 Burnyeat, pp. 34, 43. 

3" Journal, "pp. 60 ff. 



Early Years in America. 79 

son. It is said that the number of the Society was 
' about doubled through George Fox's preaching, 
many of the prominent colonists being converted.^ 
It might have been supposed that in Maryland, 
as in Rhode Island, the Quakers would have 
found rest if not a welcome, but such was not the 
case. Though there are good reasons for be- 
lieving that Elizabeth Harris was in Maryland 
during 1657, the first positively recorded visit was 
that of Josiah Coale and Thomas Thurston in 
1658, for whose arrest a warrant was issued in 
July of that year, because they had been in the 
province over a month without taking the oath 
of fidelity ; and two weeks later, on account of 
their " insolent behavior '* in standing ** presump- 
tuously covered," they were forever banished, on 
pain of being whipped from constable to constable. 
Those who had entertained them and a man who 
had refused to assist in the arrest of Thurston 
were whipped.^ 

There were many refugees from Virginia in 
Maryland, as well as many other persons in the 
colony, who were without preachers. To such 

1 ** Journal," pp. 375-382 ; Bowden, vol. i., p. 354. The opening 
entry of the Records of Virginia Yearly Meeting states : " This 
booke begun in the year 1673 by the motion and order of George 
Ffox, the servant of God." (MS. Records Virginia Yearly 
Meeting.) Virginia Yearly Meeting, first held at Pagan Creek, 
Isle of Wight County, was afterward held at various places until 
1845, when it was joined to Baltimore Yearly Meeting. 

2 Besse, vol. ii., p. 380 ; Neill, " Founders of Maryland," p. 
131 ; Archives of Maryland, " Proceedings of Council," 1636-67, 
pp. 348-353, 364, 494 ; J. Saurin Norris, " The Early Friends in 
Maryland," Md. Historical Society, Baltimore, 1862, pp. 6-9 ; J. 
Thomas Scharf, *' History of Maryland," vol. i., p. 268. 



8o The Friends. 

these earnest preachers were most welcome. In 
1659 William Robinson and others visited Mary- 
land without hindrance. But during the Claiborne 
troubles a militia was organized, and Friends 
suffered much from fines and distraints on account 
of their refusal to bear arms or contribute funds. 
The names of thirty who thus refused and the de- 
tailed account of property seized are preserved, 
showing that they were well-to-do/ In 1660 per- 
secution ceased, and, with a slight exception in 
1662, for sixteen years there was no act of in- 
tolerance. The Perrot heresy, however, was rife, 
among the adherents being Thomas Thurston.^ 
In April, 1672, John Burnyeat ** appointed a 
meeting at West River, in Maryland, for all the 
Friends in the province, that I might see them 
together before I departed. . . . And when the 
time appointed came, George Fox with several 
brethren came from Jamaica and landed at Per- 
tuxon, and from thence came straight to the meet- 
ing.'' There was a very large meeting, which 
continued for several days, and ** a men-and- 
women's meeting for the settling of things was 
set up. . . . G. F. did wonderfully open the ser- 
vice thereof unto Friends, and they with gladness 
of heart received advice in such necessary things."* 

1 Besse, vol. ii., pp. 378 ff . ; Neill, " Founders of Maryland," p. 
149. 

^ Burnyeat, p. 33. 

^ Ibid., p. 43. See also Fox*s "Journal," p. 364, who says 
"five or six justices of the peace " and the speaker of the As- 
sembly were present, besides " many of the world's people." (J. 
S. Norris, "The Early Friends," pp. 12 ff.) 



Early Years in America. 8i 

This meeting, the first for discipline in Maryland, 
was the beginning of what was afterward known 
as Baltimore Yearly Meeting, and has been held 
regularly ever since. 

George Fox held meetings and established 
meetings for discipline at various places on both 
sides of Chesapeake Bay. One interesting episode 
of this visit was the effort to reach the Indians. 
He had two ** good opportunities with the Indian 
emperor and his kings *' on the eastern shore, and 
was listened to with the deepest attention. On 
his return from New England in September, 1672 
he visited Maryland a second time, when he held 
many meetings, and some with the Indians. The 
meetings among the colonists were largely at- 
tended, sometimes a thousand being present. His 
account of this journey is most graphic/ 

" His labors had been incessant ; neither wintry 
sleet nor the burning sun detained. He forded 
streams, slept in the woods and in barns with as 
much serenity as in the comfortable houses of his 
friends, and was truly a wonder unto many/' ^ 

Fox's visit appears to have been the occasion of 
starting a regular correspondence, first between 
the Friends of England and America, then of 
America as well.* 



1 " Journal," pp. 372-375- 

2 Neill, " Founders of Maryland," p. 145. 

3 Bristol Friends wrote to those of Maryland, ** 24th of 9th mo. 
[November], 1673." (Bowden, vol. i., pp. 355, '^yy.) Epistolary 
correspondence with London Yearly Meeting has been kept up 
to the present day. 

6 



82 The Friends. 

The sufferings of Friends in Maryland were 
small in comparison with those in other colonies, 
and the fines and imprisonments which they un- 
derwent were almost wholly on account of their 
testimonies against tithes, oaths, and military 
services. From 1674 until they gained, in 1702, 
the privileges they sought, petition after petition 
in regard to oaths was made to the Assembly and 
Council, and more than once favorably considered 
by one or both bodies, only to be ignored or 
refused by the proprietaries/ Meantime the 
Friends grew in numbers and in influence, so 
strong, indeed, that largely through their opposi- 
tion the act for the establishment of the Pro- 
testant religion, in 1691, was rendered inoperative ; 
an act passed in 1694 forbidding the Roman 
Catholic worship was repealed in 1695, through 
their influence and that of the Catholics. Again, 
these two bodies used all their power to prevent 
the Episcopal Church being made the established 
church, but were only partly successful. The 
Friends were more successful in February, 1702/3, 
in getting the law modified as far as ** Protestant 
dissenters and Quakers *' were concerned.^ 



1 Archives of Maryland, Proceedings of Assembly, 1 666-76, pp- 
354, 492: Proceedings of Council, 16S7-8-93, pp. 57, 221 ; NeilU 
"Founders of Maryland," p. 164; Bowden, vol. i., pp. 382 ff. ; 
Besse, vol. ii., pp. 383-388 ; J. Thomas Scharf, " History of 
Maryland," Baltimore, 1879, vol. i., p. 270; George Petrie, 
*' Johns Hopkins University Studies," vol. x., pp. 35 ff. ; Janney's 
" Penn," p. io6; T. C. Gambrall, " Early Maryland," New York, 
1893, p. 199. 

2 Scharf, vol. i., pp. 365 ff. 



Early Years in America. 83 

The first Friends in New Jersey appear to have 
settled along the Raritan River in 1664; ^ in 1670 
a meeting was settled at Shrewsbury, where a 
meeting-house was built ; in 1672 George Fox and 
his companions visited the Friends at this place 
and also at Middletown.^ 

In 1674 Berkeley, one of the proprietors, sold his 
half of the province of New Jersey to John Fen- 
wicke and Edward Billinge for ;^iooo. Both of 
these men were members of the Society of Friends, 
and there is some reason to think that the acquisi- 
tion was made for the benefit of the Society at 
large. A difference having arisen between these 
two men, William Penn was chosen arbitrator, 
who made an award. Edward Billinge became 
embarrassed in his circumstances, and he assigned 
his property to three of his fellow-members, one 
of whom was William Penn.^ This was the 
beginning of William Penn*s personal interest in 
America. The subsequent circumstances which 
led to the division of New Jersey into East and 
West Jersey and the disputes with Fenwicke 
cannot be entered into here. John Fenwicke with 
a company of emigrants landed June, 1675, on the 
shores of Delaware Bay, at a place they named 
Salem. Meantime William Penn and his co-pro- 



1 Bancroft, (Last Revision), vol. i., p. 521 ; Bowden, vol. i., p. 

387. 

2 " Journal," pp. 365, 370; Bumyeat, p. 45 ; Edmundson, p. 92. 

3 " Two West Jersey Tracts " (Reprint), New York, 1880. 
Thomas Shourds, *' History of Fenwick's Colony, etc.," Bridge- 
ton, N. J., 1876. 



84 The Friends. 

prietors issued a statement of their views in regard 
to the government of the province. They said : 
" Thus we lay a foundation for after ages to 
understand their Hberty as men and Christians, 
that they may not be brought into bondage but 
by their own consent ; for we put the power in 
the people. . . . No person to be called in ques- 
tion or molested for his conscience or for wor- 
shipping according to his conscience.'* ^ The 
charter of West New Jersey, known as the ** Con- 
cessions and Agreements, etc.,'* dated *^ 3rd day 
of March, 1676/7,'* consisting of forty-four chap- 
ters, is drawn up in the spirit of the words just 
quoted.^ 

In 1677 two hundred and thirty Friends emi- 
grated in a body to the new province. So striking 
a circumstance as this attracted even royal atten- 
tion, and it is said that as the ship was about 
sailing King Charles II., who was ** in his barge 
pleasuring on the Thames, came alongside and 
gave them his blessing/' ^ 

The emigrants from this ship founded Burling- 
ton in 1677 ; other emigrants followed, so that by 
1681 fourteen hundred had come thither, mostly 
Friends. Their just treatment of the Indians not 
only secured them from molestation, but brought 
them supplies of maize and venison. They were 

1 S. Smith, ** History of New Jersey," p. 80; New Jersey Ar- 
chives, vol. i., p. 228. See also Edmundson, pp. 92, 94. 

•^ New Jersey Archives, vol. i., pp. 241 ff. ; Smith, Appendix, 
pp. 52T ff. 

3 Smith, p. 93. 



I 



Early Years in America. 85 

"zealous in performing their religious service, for, 
having at first no meeting-house to keep public 
meeting in, they made a tent or covert of sail- 
cloth to meet under; '* they then met in private 
houses until a meeting-house could be built.^ By 
common agreement, *\for the well ordering of the 
affairs of the church '* a monthly meeting was set 
up " the 15th of the 5th month [July], 1678/* At 
the next meeting *Mt was agreed that a collection 
be made once a month for the relief of the poor 
and such other necessary uses as may occur, . . . 
to be collected the First day before the Monthly 
Meeting/' ^ On " the 4th of 7 month [September] 
1679,'' ** it was also desired that Friends would 
consider the matter as touching the selling of 
Rum unto Indians [if it] be lawful at all for 
Friends professing truth to be concerned in it/' ' 
The earliest Epistle from an American meeting to 
the Yearly Meeting in London was sent by 
Burlington Friends in 1681. Friends continued 
to come to this land of liberty, and various 
meetings were established. Burlington Quarterly 
Meeting appears to have been set up in 1680, and 
in May, 1681, it was concluded to establish a 
Yearly Meeting to be held in the *' sixth month '* 
(August) following. This meeting was held for 
four days. A meeting was held annually until 

^ Proud's, " Pennsylvania," vol. i,, p. 157. 

2 MS. Records, Burlington Monthly Meeting ; also Bowden, 
vol. i., p. 401 ; A. M. Gummere in *' Pennsylvania Magazine of 
History and Biography^" vol. vii., p. 249 ; vol. viii., p. 3, etc. 

2 MS. Records, Burlington Monthly Meeting. 



86 The Friends. 

1686, after which for a number of years it was held 
alternately at Burlington and Philadelphia. 

The success which Friends had met with in 
West New Jersey naturally led them to look to- 
ward East New Jersey, and in 1681 it was pur- 
chased by William Penn and eleven other Friends ; 
these increased the number of proprietors to 
twenty-four, among whom were included those not 
members. Several of the new owners were 
Scotchmen, among them Robert Barclay, the 
Apologist ; he was elected governor of New 
Jersey, but never went out himself, appointing 
Thomas Rudyard as his deputy.^ In 1688 the 
proprietors surrendered their political rights to 
the crown. 

The earliest Friend in the Carolinas of whom 
there is any record is Henry Phillips, who lived 
where Hertford now is, and who was visited by 
William Edmundson in 1671 ; he had not seen 
a Friend for seven years. Edmundson appointed 
a meeting, which was attended by many people, 
" but they had little or no religion, for they came 
and sat down in the meeting smoking their 
pipes.'* He made some impression, however,, for 
they wished to have more meetings. A quarterly 
Meeting for discipline was established, said to be 
the first religious organization in North Carolina.^ 

George Fox in 1672 was the next visitor, and 



1 Smith, pp. 156, 166 ; Winsor, vol. iii., pp. 435 ff. ; New Jersey 
Archives, vol. i., pp. 376, 383, 395 ff. ; Whitehead, pp. n8 £f. 

2 Edmundson, p. 59 ff. ; Bowden, vol. i., pp. 409 ff . 



Early Years in America. 87 

has left a graphic account of his visit.^ Edmund- 
son went to Carolina again in 1676, and from his 
account it would seem that Friends were estab- 
lished there.^ Though some of the inhabitants 
may have been religious refugees from Virginia, 
the accounts of Fox and of Edmundson do not 
convey that impression. The early Quakers in 
North Carolina appear to have been originally 
persons without religion, and to have been first 
converted through the efforts of these mission- 
aries.^ 

Monthly and quarterly meetings were set up 
probably as early as 1680, and George Fox, writ- 
ing in 168 1, advises the establishment of a Half- 
Yearly or Yearly Meeting.* In 1698 the Yearly 
Meeting was set up, and from that date to 
the present has been held regularly. The settle- 
ments were at first on or near Albemarle Sound, 
but as the colony increased in population the 
Friends spread, not only in the northern part of 
the province but in the southern, for we find Fox 
addressing an Epistle to Friends in Charleston, 
1683, in answer to one sent by them to him dur- 



1 " Journal,'* p. 376. 2 Edmundson, pp. 99 ff. 

3 Stephen B. Weeks, "The Religious Development in the 
Province of North Carolina," " John Hopkins University Studies 
in History and Political Science," Tentli Series, Baltimore, 1892, 
pp. 22. ff. 

* " Epistles." p. 462. Late in 1691 or early in 1692 Thomas 
Wilson and James Dickinson visited Friends in North Carolina, 
" who were exceeding glad to see [them], they not having had 
any visit by a traveling F'riend for several years." Wilson also 
speaks of the wolves roaring " about the houses in the night 
time." (Wilson, p. 29; Dickinson, p. 53. 



88 The Friends. . 

ing the previous year/ During the seventeenth 
century there was perfect religious liberty in the 
Carohnas, and, as in Rhode Island, Friends were 
very influential. They reached the height of 
their influence under the administration of John 
Archdale, himself a Friend. The history of this 
remarkable man has been too much neglected. 
He appears to have become a Friend under the 
preaching of George Fox. He was elected gover- 
nor by the proprietaries, his declaration being ac- 
cepted in place of the usual oath, and, coming out 
to the province, brought order out of the political 
chaos. Naturally he regarded the scruples of the 
Friends, and they became members of the Assem- 
bly, and held other offices. Though never in the 
majority, they held the virtual control from 1694 
to 1699. 

Archdale's scruples as a Friend did not prevent 
him from requiring strict obedience to the laws. 
In 1696 the representatives in South Carolina de- 
clared that Archdale by *'his wisdom, patience^ 
and labor had laid a firm foundation for a glorious 
superstruction.'' ^ 

The culmination of Quaker influence was 
reached in Pennsylvania. This colony was an 
obvious result of Penn's connection with the 
Jerseys already referred to, where the success of 

1 " Epistles," p. 490. 

2 Weeks, pp. 32 ff. ; Bancroft, vol. ii., pp. 11, 12 (last revision) ; 
Bowden, vol. i., p. 415. Archdale wrote a description of Carolina, 
printed in London, 1707. See W. J. Rivers in Winsor, vol. v., 
pp. 2S5 if. 



Early Years in America. 89 

the Quaker colonists must have confirmed in his 
mind a project of securing for his fellow-believers 
a safe refuge from persecution. This idea was 
not original with Penn ; Fox had suggested it in 
1660/ 

William Penn joined the Quakers in 1667, and 
almost at once became one of the most prominent 
and influential. The story of his life, often told, 
is outside the limits of this sketch.^ 

As is well known, Penn obtained the grant of 
Pennsylvania in consideration of a debt due by the 
crown to his father, the late Admiral Penn,*'' in 
the year 1681,* and at once made preparations 
for the establishment of the new colony. No 
founder of a State ever placed before himself a 
nobler object than did Penn. He desired ** to es- 
tablish a just and righteous [government] in this 
province, that others may take example by it. 

^ Bowden, vol. i., pp. 388, 389. 

2 " The Friend," (Phila.), vol. 7, p. ^-j ; " Friends' Review,'* 
vol. I, pp. 1-^, 34; " Penna. Magazine," vol. 6, p. 313. 

^ See F. D. Stone's admirable " The Founding of Pennsyl- 
vania," in Winsor, vol. iii., pp. 469 ff. ; Bowden, vol. ii., chapters 
i.-vi. Janney's " Life of Penn " is still the best ; W. H. Dixon's, 
" William Penn " is by an outsider. John Stoughton, " William 
Penn," London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1882, also by an outsider, 
is the best except Janney's. Macaulay's charges in his " Plistory 
of England " against Penn, still stand in the text. They have been 
disproved by Janney, Dixon, and Stoughton in their " Lives "; 
by John Paget in his " Paradoxes and Puzzles," Edinburgh, 
1874, and others. The reader is warned against A. C Buell, 
*' William Penn," N. Y., 1904, a flippant and untrustworthy book. 

* The name was given by the king in honor of Admiral Penn ; 
William Penn would have called it New Wales, then Sylvania, 
but without avail ; ** nor would twenty guineas move the under- 
secretary to vary the name.'* (" Letter," *' 5th of ist mo., 1681," 
Janney, p. 165.) 



90 The Friends. 

. . . The nations want a precedent. . . . I . . . 
desire that we may do the thing that is truly wise 
and just.'^ Again : *' There may be room there, 
though not here, for such an holy experiment/* ^ 
In accord with these fundamental principles, he 
prepared and published his well-known Frame of 
Government, an admirable document, of which, 
though he took counsel of others, he was un- 
questionably the chief author.^ In the preface he 
lays down the maxim : " Any government is free 
to the people under it, whatever be the frame, 
where the laws rule and the people are a party to 
those laws ; and more than this is tyranny, 
oligarchy, or confusion/* What he meant was 
shown by his words in one of his early letters 
respecting the province : ** I propose ... to leave 
myself and successors no power of doing mischief, 
that the will of one man may not hinder the good 
of an whole country/' ^ 

In examining the Frame of Government, and 
particularly Penn*s charter, it must be remem- 
bered that he could not do exactly as he wished : 
as in the case of the death penalty, and in his 
having command of the mihtia, etc/ 

In addition to Pennsylvania Penn acquired 

1 Proud, vol. i., p. 169; Janney, p. 175. 

2 Dixon tries to show that he was greatly indebted to Algernon 
Sidney; but see Janney, p. 193; Stoughton, p. 177; " Penns and 
Peningtons," p. 333. 

^ Janney, pp. 187, 172 ; Proud, vol. ii., Appendix II. ; Colonial 
Records, vol. i. ; Hazard, " Annals of Pennsylvania,'* pp. 558 ff, 

* Sections v., xv. These documents are printed in full in 
Proud, Hazard's " Annals," and Colonial Records. 



Early Years in America. 91 

from the Duke of York, as a gift, nearly what is 
now the State of Delaware.^ the reputation of 
WiUiam Penn attracted a large number of emi- 
grants, not only from Great Britain but from 
the Continent, where a pamphlet descriptive of 
the province was circulated. Two emigrant ships 
sailed from London in the autumn of 168 1. The 
experiences of some of these emigrants on their 
arrival were remarkable.^ Penn sent out a deputy- 
governor, William Markham, in 1681, and went 
himself in 1682. After a voyage of about two 
months, during which the smallpox broke out on 
the ship, the *' Welcome '* arrived off New Castle 
October 27th. On the 29th (O. S.) he reached 
Upland (now Chester) within the bounds of his 
province. He proceeded at once to organize the 
government. Philadelphia had been first laid 
out in August or September, 1682, "and before 
Penn sailed for England in 1684 had three hun- 
dred and fifty-seven houses, many of them three 
stories high.** *' In 1685 William Bradford estab- 
lished his printing-press in Philadelphia, the first 
in the Middle Colonies.**^ Penn found much to 
do. Among other things he visited Lord Balti- 
more, in order to settle the boundaries between 
Pennsylvania and Maryland, but the effort was 



^ Proud, vol. i., p. 202 ; Colonial Records, vol. i. ; Hazard's 
" Annals," p. 587. 

2 Watson, "Aanals of Philadelphia"; Hazard, " Annals," pp. 

537, 557- 

3 Stone, p. 493; Proud, vol. i., pp. 233, 241 ff.; vol. ii.. Ap- 
pendix I. (Penn's Concessions). 



92 The Friends. 

unsuccessful. Nor were the boundaries agreed 
upon until the running of Mason and Dixon's 
Line in 1762.^ Penn also visited New York, New 
Jersey, and attended the Yearly Meeting in Mary- 
land. He returned to England in 1684, impelled 
thereto by matters, personal, affecting his reputa- 
tion, and others affecting his province and the 
Society of his adoption. No colony in America 
had advanced so rapidly ; schools and a printing- 
press had been established, and a population of 
seven thousand collected in less than three 
years. 

One of the earliest matters to give Penn concern 
was the just treatment of the Indians ; before he 
went out he had refused a large offer for the ex- 
clusive privilege of trading with the Indians, and 
had sent written instructions to his commissioners 
regarding the natives, writing also an Epistle to 
the latter. He cherished hopes of civilizing them 
and preserving amicable relations with them, and 
he provided that the differences between them and 

1 The real trouble lay in the ignorance of the English Govern- 
ment of American geography, which gave rise to many conflicting 
claims in the colonies. Penn was probably right if the spirit of 
the grants be taken, while Baltimore technically may have had 
the advantage. The dispute has given rise to attacks on Penn's 
character, one of the sharpest of which is that by William Hand 
Browne, in " Maryland," American Commonwealth Series, Bos- 
ton, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1884, pp. 137-149 ; see also N. D. 
Mereness, " Maryland as a Proprietary Colony," N. Y., 1903, pp. 
29-33. Penn's character and his letters and the documents clear 
him of the aspersions cast upon him. Full references as to the 
dispute are given by Stone, in Winsor, vol. iii., p. 513 ; see also 
Proud, vol. i., pp. 265-2S4 ; vol. ii., pp. 206-211. For a recent 
temperate discussion see C. M. Andrews, " Colonial Self-Govern- 
ment," N. Y., 1904, pp. 169-175. 



Early Years in America. 93 

the settlers should be settled by arbitration. He 
did not believe that his charter extinguished their 
rights to the land, but purchased from them the 
land before occupation/ 

The exact provisions and circumstances, of the 
famous treaty at Shackamaxon are somewhat 
problematical, but there is no doubt that the 
tradition preserves the spirit of the interview and 
Penn's high purposes.^ 

The majority of colonists at first were Friends 
from England and Wales, but there were also a 
number from Germany, among them some from 
Kriesheim, Germany, near Worms. According 
to Sewel these were converted by William Ames, 
one of the early Quaker missionaries, who visited 
the Palatinate in 1659. " On the settlement of 
Pennsylvania in America , . . they unanimously 
went thither/' ^ They settled at a place they 
called Germantown. Such was the origin of 
this well-known division of Philadelphia. Among 



1 Proud, vol. i., pp. 211-215, 300 ; Hazard's " Annals," pp. 519, 
532, 581, 595 ; Bovvden, vol. ii., pp. 57 ff. Penn is said to have 
given in all about ;^20,ooo to the Indians. (Bowden, vol. ii., p. 
72.) 

2 Stone, in Winsor, vol. iii., p. 513, and "Pennsylvania Maga- 
zine of History," vol. vi., p. 217 ; Janney, p. 213. The well-known 
picture of West gives a totally wrong idea of Penn's appearance ; 
far from being a portly, middle-aged man, he was only thirty-eight 
years old, athletic, active, and graceful. He is said to have worn 
a sky-blue frock, the insignia of his office, and to have been 
dressed as other gentlemen of the period, lacking the sword and 
plumes, which would have been usually worn by persons in such 
a position. 

8 Sewel, p. 196 ; Proud, vol. i., p. 219 ; " Pennsylvania Maga- 
zine of History," vol. iv., p. i. 



94 The Friends. 

the Germans was Francis Daniel Pastorius, the 
hero of Whittier's " Pennsylvania Pilgrim/* 

It would be interesting to give the history of this 
experiment in government in Pennsylvania, but 
the limits of this sketch and its character forbid 
it. Suffice it to say that though the proprietor 
and his government were not without great trials 
and testings, if prosperity, peace with the Indians, 
and development are any criterion, Penn*s exper- 
iment must be pronounced a success, at least for 
the first ten years. Under Penn's deputies and 
the royal administration there was much political 
disorder, but in spite of this the colony developed 
satisfactorily in material prosperity, so that in 
1700 it was one of the most prosperous of all the 
English colonies. 

'* Our first concern was to keep up and maintain 
our religious worship," so writes one of Penn's 
companions on the " Welcome." ^ The meetings 
were first held in private houses, but meeting- 
houses were soon built. The first monthly meet- 
ing was held '' the 9th day of the Eleventh month 
[January, 1682/83], being the third day of the 
week, 1682," "and every third meeting shall be 
the Quarterly Meeting." Within three months 
nine meetings for worship and three monthly 
meetings had been set up. There were a few 



1 S. W. Pennypacker, " Settlement of Germantown," Phila- 
delphia, 1899. 

2 Richard Townsend. Proud, vol. L, p. 229 ; Bowden, vol. ii., 
p. 17. 



Early Years in America. 95 

Friends in the province before Penn acquired it, 
and there appears to have been a monthly meet- 
ing at Upland (Chester) in 168 1. ^ 

The Friends of the new colony attended the 
Yearly Meeting at Burlington, and in 1683 a prop- 
osition was made that there should be a Yearly 
Meeting for Friends of all the North American 
colonies ; but this was not acceptable to the other 
bodies of Friends, and nothing came of it. Yearly 
Meetings were held in Philadelphia during 1683 
and 1684, and an effort was made, by sending 
Epistles to " Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, and all 
thereaway ; also the other way to New England 
and Rhode Island,'* to induce the distant Friends 
to send two or three delegates to Philadelphia as 
a center. Women Friends also held a Yearly 
Meeting, and sent an Epistle to the Women 
Friends of England.^ In 1685 it was concluded 
that the Yearly Meeting should be held alternately 
at Burlington and Philadelphia ; a Yearly Meeting 
of ministers was also established. In 1685, 1686, 
and 1687 Friends attended from Maryland, New 
York, and Long Island. The large and growing 
body was not, however, without its troubles, for 

1 Bowden, vol. ii., p. 19 ; Michener, p. 50. There is an account 
of these early settlers, some of them claiming to be Friends, in 
the " Journal " of Jasper Bankers and Peter Sluyter (Long 
Island Historical Society Publications, vol. i,, Brooklyn, 1867). 
There is no doubt from the description that they were of those 
who had ** run out from the truth," and who gave Fox, Edmund- 
son, and Burnyeat so much concern. This account has been un- 
justly quoted as a fair description of the Friends of this period 
(Browne's " Maryland," p. 135.) 

2 ** The Friend " (Philadelphia), vol. xviii., p. 134. 



96 



The Friends. 



in 1691 began the schism of George Keith, which 
affected not only the religious organization but 
the political organization as well/ helping to de- 
prive Penn for a time of his province.^ This 

1 C. M. Andrews, " Colonial Self-Government," N. Y., 1904, p. 
20T. 

2 George Keith was a Scotchman, a man of unusual ability, 
but ill balanced. He was highlj'^ educated, and was brought up 
as a rigid Presbyterian. How he came to join the Society is not 
known. He was for about thirty years a stanch upholder of the 
views of Friends and bore his full share of the " sufferings for 
the truth." He took an active part with Penn and Barclay in 
public disputes in defending the doctrines of the Society, Before 
he went to America he had occasioned some anxiety on account 
of speculative opinions which he had embraced. In 1687 he ran 
the dividing line between East and West Jersey, and in 16S9 he 
removed to Philadelphia on his appointment as head-master of 
the "public school" just started, which still flourishes, the Wil- 
liam Penn Charter School. At the end of a year he was released 
from the position at his own request. His opposition to the 
Society first made itself openly manifest at this time — why, it is 
hard to tell, though Gough mtimates that disappointment at not 
being recognized as leader on the death of George Fox (1690) 
occasioned his defection. He was disowned by the Friends in 
America, 1692. Appealing to the various meetings in Pennsyl- 
vania and New Jersey, he carried his case to the London Yearly 
Meeting, 1694; after occupying the careful attention of that 
meeting, and the one in 1695, ^^ ^^^^ disowned in London also. 
This action was without precedent, and it is likely that the 
English Friends only took cognizance of the case because the 
schism had extended to England. Keith joined the Church of 
England in 1700, w^as ordained, and in 1702 was sent to America 
by the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign 
Parts. His mission was not a success so far as converting the 
Quakers was concerned. After an absence of about two years he 
returned, was given a living in Sussex, where he died in 1716. 
He was particularly bitter against his old associate Penn. 
Croese, book i., p. 150; book ii., p. 164, and Appendix : Sewel, 
pp. 504, 510, 535, 616, 636, 648, 664; Gough, vol. iii., chaps, vi., 
viii., xiii. ; Dickinson, p. 52 ; Wilson, p. 32 ; Bownas, pp. 54 ff. ; 
Bowden, vol. ii., chap. iv. ; Smith, " History of Pennsylvania '* 
in Hazard's " Register of Pennsylvania," vol. vi., pp. 242 ff. ; 
Turner, chap. xiv. ; Burnet, " History of His Own Time," p. 670, 
London, ReeA^es & Turner (1883) ; Isaac Sharpless, " A Quaker 
Experiment in Government," Phila., 1898, pp. 71-83; see also 
" George Keith," Dictionary of National Biography, London and 
New York, Macmillan & Co., 1892. 



Early Years in America. 97 

schism shook the Society of Friends in the Mid- 
dle Colonies, and also in Fngland, to its founda- 
tions. There was much acrimony exhibited on 
both sides, but Keith seems to have been violent 
in his language and overbearing in his manner. 
To his opponents he certainly appeared to be an 
"apostate,'* and it is not unnatural that they 
should have used strong language. He accused 
two ministers of teaching that the inward Christ 
alone was sufficient for salvation ; he charged that 
the discipline was lax ; that Friends had departed 
from their testimony and practice against war ; 
he wished changes made in various ways ; and 
openly in a meeting accused Friends of meeting 
together " to cloak heresies and deceit/* Some 
of his charges were without foundation, and while 
there is no doubt that others were true as to in- 
dividuals and that there was some truth in others, 
their wholesale character was unjustifiable and the 
way in which they were preferred altogether out 
of order. The documents issued officially by the 
Society in England (see p. 54) and in America show 
incontestably, that, whatever individuals might 
say, the Friends in 1693, as a body, were sound 
on the fundamental doctrines of the Christian 
religion.^ 

1 Friends in London put forth a document entitled " The 
Christian Doctrine and Society of the People called Quakers, 
cleared, etc.," Sewel, pp. 619-626; *' Christian Doctrine, etc," 
pp. 6 ff. (in part) ; Barclay, " Inner Life " (p. 375, note), says that 
Keith was disowned "for his unbearable temper and carriage." 
The London Epistle for 1695 speaks of " C. K." as continuing in 
" the same spirit of discord and opposition." (" Epistles," vol. i., 

7 



98 The Friends. 

Keith's followers set up a new organization, 
called the *' Christian Quakers and Friends/' but 
the organization did not last very long.^ Keith's 
connection with political matters must be passed 
over, as well as the general political matters of the 
colony. The colony was taken possession of by 
the crown, mainly on account of the refusal of the 
Assembly to vote any money for military purposes, 
though Penn's arrest for treason, and the Keith 
disorders had their influence in bringing it about. 
The colony was restored to Penn in 1694. It has 
been claimed that he did not at that time object 
to granting money or men for the defense of the 
frontier, but it appears that he simply said he 
would transmit to the Assembly *' all orders that 
the crown might issue for the safety and security 
of the province." ^ 

The Society continued to increase in numbers, 
so that in 1700 there were forty individual meet- 
ings or congregations. There were many Welsh 

p. 82.) For the account of an eyewitness in London ; [John 
Whiting] " Persecution Expos'd, etc.," London, Assigns of J. 
Sowle, 171 5, p. 231. For a graphic account of a personal dispute 
with George Keith at Lynn, Mass.; Journal of John Richardson, 
Philadelphia, Joseph Crukshank, 1783, pp. 103-127. 

■^ Keith's followers put forth a statement of their doctrine, " A 
Confession of Faith, etc." " Given forth from the Yearly 
Meeting at Burlington, the 7th, 7th moneth, 1692." Printed and 
sold by William Bradford in Philadelphia, 1693 (2 ed.). This 
little volume is very rare. There also exists in a contemporary 
manuscript endorsed "Articles of George Keith for his Proselites 
to signe before they received admission into his church fellow- 
ship." Copies of both are in the Library of Haverford College, 
Ilaverford, Pa. 

2 Bowden, vol. ii., p. 134; Janney, chap, xxviii., p. 395; Proud, 
vol. i., chaps, xi.-xiii. 



Early Years in America. 99 

settlers, who took up land to the north and west 
of Philadelphia, and a number of meetings were 
established among them. 

Thus the seventeenth century closed with con- 
gregations of Friends established in all of the 
colonies under the English rule, while in Pennsyl- 
vania they were the controlling element, and in 
the Jerseys and Maryland they had much influence 
in modifying legislation. 



CHAPTER IV. 

IT will be impracticable to describe in detail the 
progress of the Society during the eighteenth 
century, nor is it needful, for there are no es- 
sential features of difference in any one part of the 
country. During the earlier years of the century, 
Friends, except where the privileges had been ob- 
tained, were striving to obtain relief from the im- 
position of taxes for the support of a state church, 
from the requirement of taking judicial oaths, and 
from contributing directly to the support of the 
army. Their success in these respects in Massa- 
chusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, and North 
Carolina has been already referred to, and, with 
the exception of military service, most of the 
privileges sought were acquired. In Pennsylvania, 
owing to the increase of immigrants belonging to 
other denominations, to the colonial wars, and to 
the dissatisfaction of the English Government 
with the peace principles of the Quakers, the ma- 
jority of Friends in the Assembly decreased, until 
in 1756 six Friends vacated their seats in the As- 
sembly, and at the next election others declined 
to be candidates. From this time onward Friends 
discouraged members of the Society from holding 

lOI 



102 The Friends. 

any office.* But this action did not put an end to 
their influence and the exact time when the politi- 
cal control of the Quakers ceased in Pennsylvania 
is hard to determine. 

The troubles in 1754 and 1755 led to the estab- 
lishment in 1756 of the first *' Meeting for Suffer- 
ings** in America. Its object primarily was to 
extend relief and assistance to Friends on the 
frontiers who might suffer from the Indians or 
other enemies ; to represent the Yearly Meeting ; 
and to look out for the interests of the Society, 
etc., but not to ** meddle with matters of faith or 
discipline.'*^ 

The Society of Friends continued to grow in 
the various colonies during the first half of the cen- 
tury, but it is difficult to arrive at a satisfactory 
estimate of the total number of members. In 
1700 the members in England and Wales have 



1 Colonial Records, vol. vii., pp. 82, 84, 86, 292 ; Archives, vols, 
v., vi. ; Hazard's " Register," vol. v., p. 115 ; " The Friend " (Phil- 
adelphia), vols, xix., XX. ; Thomas F. Gordon, ** History of Penn- 
sylvania," Philadelphia, Carey, Lea & Carey, 1829, pp. 2S1, 321 ff., 
339 ff. ; Bowden, vol. ii., pp. 278 ff. ; A. C. Applegarth, in *' Johns 
Hopkins University Studies," vol. x., pp. 427 ft. ; Michener, pp. 
274, 281 ; Isaac Sharpless, "Quaker Government in Pennsyl- 
vania," Phila. 1900, vol i., pp. 247-258 ; " Memoirs of Samuel Foth- 
ergill," pp. 240 ff. ; Catharine Phillips, pp. 132, 141 ; Gough, vol. 
iv., pp. 458 ff. In Sandwich, Mass., Quarterly Meeting Records, 
" No members of Select Meeting [ministers and elders] to hold 
public office of honor, profit, or trust," nor members of *' Meeting 
for Sufferings/' '' 8th Mo. 1788." "Pennsylvania Magazine of 
History and Biography," vol. x., p. 283. 

2 Michener, pp. 31 ff. ; Bowden, vol. ii., p. 283. The New Eng- 
land Meeting appears to have been established 1775. "Book of 
Discipline," Providence, John Carter,i785, p. ']^ ; the Baltimore 
Meeting in 1778, " Discipline," p. 46. 



The Eighteenth Century. 103 

been estimated at about 66,000.* The estimates 
about 1760 of the number of Friends in Pennsyl- 
vania and New Jersey would make the number of 
Friends in America about 50,000, perhaps more.* 
But it is impossible to give accurate data. Bownas, 
who visited America in 1702, and again in 1726, 
notices the great increase in numbers during the 
intervening period, and speaks of several meetings 
of fifteen hundred people.^ With the cessation of 
persecution and the increase of the number of 
adherents had come laxity in regard to the good 
order of the Society, and a declension in spiritual 
life. This was true of England as well. The 
journals or lives of Bownas,* Samuel Fothergill,^ 
Catharine (Payton) Phillips,^ William Reckitt,^ 
Mary (Peisley) Neale,^ John Griffith,® and others 
are full of testimony to this fact in America, and 
the manuscript records of the various meetings 
also bear ample evidence to the same effect. The 
tendency was, as Bownas remarks, to run to form 



> J. S. Rowntree, p. 73 ; Barclay, " Inner Life," p. 633. 

2 Sparks's *' Franklin," vol. iv., p. 165 (53,000), but this is much 
exaggerated ; Hazard's " Register." vol. v., p. $39 (25,000) ; Bow- 
den, vol. ii., pp. 245, 376. 

2 " Journal," p. 139. 

4 " Life," p. 139. 

5 " Memoirs of Samuel Fothergill,'* Liverpool, 1843, pp. 159, 
166, 168, 187, 214, 280 (a long account of the meetings in America 
in 1756). 

6 " Memoir of Catharine Phillips," Philadelphia, 1798, pp. 107, 
118, 138. 

■^ " Life," London, 1776, pp. 138, 151. 

8 " Life of Samuel and Mary Neale," London, 1845, pp.335, 342, 
353, 356. 

9 "Journal," 1779, pp. 36S, 371, 375, 381, 383, 394, 399. 



104 The Friends. 

rather than " to abide in the power and life." 
There was a great increase in the amount of secu- 
lar business transacted in the meetings for discip- 
line ; the dress and manner of life seemed to 
attract as much if not more attention than the 
spiritual condition of the church.* In 1755, in 
New England especially, a great awakening took 
place. All who could not show their right of 
membership* were set aside and were required to 
make new applications for admission. Queries 
relative to the state of the church were directed 
by the Yearly Meetings to be answered, and the 
replies sent to the Yearly Meeting, and there was 
a general overhauling of the church-membership. 
The comparatively informal rules of order soon 
became a Discipline. This movement extended 
throughout the Society, and marks the beginning 
of the rigid rules of order which so long character- 
ized it. As has been well said : " The increased 
attention to the Discipline, valuable and important 
as it was, was too often associated with too rigid 
an adherence to forms, and a tendency to multiply 
rules, and to make the exact carrying of them out, 
in a degree at least, a substitute for that patient 
and discriminating wisdom, tempered with love, 



' Sandwich Monthly Meeting, MS. Records, *' 8th Mo. 1751 " : 
Savory Clifton, an aged minister, " under dealing for asking an 
hired minister to pray for Butler Wing's sick family." ** 1722, 2nd 
Mo." : " Friends should not wear periwigs." " 1761, 4th Mo." : 
" Gravestones requested to be removed." 

2 The exact time when membership was established in Amer- 
ica cannot be stated with accuracy. But see p. no. 



The Eighteenth Century. 105 

which should ever characterize Christian disci- 
pline."^ 

Now began the general expulsion of members 
for marrying non-members, the severe rules in 
regard to dress and language, and many of those 
customs and outward practices which a later gen- 
eration has supposed were peculiar to Friends 
from their foundation. 

There had been various Rules of Discipline 
observed in England,^ but no Book of Discipline, 
as such, had been adopted by the Yearly Meet- 
ings until 1738, when a manuscript Book of Rules 
was sent down from the Yearly Meeting in Lon- 
don to the quarterly meetings. This consisted of 
quotations from the minutes of the Yearly Meeting 
and from *' Advices *' given forth at various times. 
The first printed Discipline was published by di- 
rection of the London Yearly Meeting of 1782, and 
published in 1783. The second edition was 
issued in 1802, and the third in 1834. "A sin- 
gular air of Secrecy was thrown around the books. 
No individual Friend was to possess a copy,'* they 
were for the exclusive use of Meetings. This edi- 
tion has been the basis of all subsequent editions 
and '' DiscipHnes *' issued by English Friends.^ 

i J. B. Braithwaite, "Memoirs of J. J. Gurney," vol. ii., p. 13. 

2 See " Treatise Concerning Christian Discipline, Compiled 
with the Advice of a National Meeting of the People called 
Quakers held in Dublin, in the Year 1746," by John Rutty, M.D. 
Printed in the year 1752. 

3 Barclay, " Inner Life," p. 527 ; J. S. Rowntree, "The Friends' 
Book of Discipline," " Friends' Quarterly Examiner," (1898) voL 
33, pp. 459-498 ; an admirable historical study. 



io6 The Friends. 

In America the " Canons and Institutions " 
(p. 52) or a modification of them were in general 
use, and though there were rules of ** good order 
of truth ** adopted by the Virginia Yearly Meet- 
ing in 1702, and seventeen *' Queries'* adopted in 
1722, these were not a formal Book of Discipline.^ 
Nor is it likely that the references in the Philadel- 
phia Records in 1707 and 171 1 refer to anything 
more.^ The regular Books of Discipline appear 
to have been generally adopted about 1759,^ but 
they were all in manuscript/ With the adoption 
and strict carrying out of a system of outward 
rules came an almost total cessation of aggressive 
efforts to spread the doctrines of the Society, and 
even of missionary efforts. The visits of ministers 
from the Old World or from the various parts of 
America were almost wholly confined to the es- 
tablished congregations, and their service to warn- 
ing, exhorting or encouraging the members to be 
faithful to the *' testimonies *' ; not that the gos- 
pel was not preached, nor the shortcomings seen, 

* Virginia MS. Records, "21st to 23d of 7th mo. [Sept] 1722." 

^ Mich en er, pp. 250 ff. 

5 The Virginia Yearly Meeting adopted a comparatively full 
Discipline in 1758, which was referred to as a " Book of Disci- 
pline " in an Epistle to *' the Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania 
and New Jersey," dated " the 13th of the 5th mo. to the 15th of 
the same inclusive, 1758." Baltimore Yearly Meeting adopted a 
Book of Discipline in 1739 (no Queries) ; New England either 
in 1759 or 1760. (Sandwich Monthly Meeting Records, 8th mo. 
1760.) 

^ New England Friends revised their Discipline in 1785, com- 
pared it with that of London, 1783, and those of the neighboring 
Yearly Meetings, and printed it 1785. Philadelphia followed in 
1797. 



The Eighteenth Century. 107 

but the remedy was thought to be a fuller sup- 
port of the Discipline. In other words, the 
•'policy was purely defensive ; they placed great 
reliance upon penalties as a means for preventing 
misconduct, and they endeavored to erect ex- 
ternal barriers against the contamination of the 
world.'* This policy resulted not only in the 
retreat " within their own borders, but in their 
endeavor, painful but fruitless, to isolate them- 
selves from that world which they had hoped to 
conquer.*' ^ They were truly philanthropic, and, 
as will be seen, advocated earnestly the cause of 
the Indian and the slave. But their spirit in 
spreading the gospel was widely different from 
that of their predecessors of the seventeenth 
century. Never, perhaps, has there been a better 
example to illustrate the fact that a church which 
is not aggressive is sure to decline. When the 
records are examined and the lists of disownments 
for ** marrying out " and for external infractions 
of the Discipline are read, the wonder is that 
there was any Society left ; well has the period 
been termed the ** middle ages of Quakerism."^ 
Not till the nineteenth century was well ad- 
vanced was there an abatement of this policy. 
Another serious result must be noticed. There 
grew up an idea that internal guidance alone was 



' " Westminster Review/' 1852, p. 619, reprinted in " Litteirs 
Livinjx Age," vol. 33, p. 443. 

2 William Thistlethwaite, " Lectures on the Rise and Progress 
of Friends," London, 1865, pp. 76-1 11 (especially pp. 91-97). 



io8 The Friends. 

essential, and this inevitably led to a depreciation 
of the importance of the Scriptures and of the 
ministry of the Word. This is shown by the 
decrease in the number of the ministers and the 
great increase in the number of the elders and 
overseers/ For fifty years or more after the 
founding of the Society there was no regular 
membership ; those who attended the meetings 
and were believed to be converted and to hold 
the views of the Society were deemed members. 
Such were invited to sit in the ** men's meetings'* 
(meetings for discipline), and also the children of 
such when old enough and thought suitable.^ 
Lists of such persons were made out and kept,' 
and such as behaved disorderly were ** denied,'' 
or ** disowned," that is, expelled. It was not until 
1737 that positive legislation on membership was 
enacted by London Yearly Meeting. The occa- 

1 Elders appear to have been first appointed in England in 
1727, and overseers in 1752, and probably about the same time 
in America. In the early days, elder and minister were often 
synonymous, and in New England in 1728 an overseer appears 
to have been equivalent to the modern elder. (See also Rutty's 
** Discipline," pp. 26 ff.) Though Philadelphia as early as 1714 
appointed elders " to sit with the ministering friends," the name 
appears to have been used in its popular sense. Barclay, *' Inner 
Life," pp. 523, 527 ; Sandwich Records, '* ist Mo. 24, 1728-29" ; 
Michener, pp. 169 ff.) It should be said that persons with some 
of the duties of overseers were appointed as early as r668, but 
the '* overseer " as now understood was not appointed until 1752. 

2 ** When about twenty years of age I was invited by Friends 
to be a member of the men's meeting in Cork " (1677). (" Life of 
Joseph Pike," by John Barclay, London, Darton & Harvey, 1837, 
p. 39 ; see also pp. 40, 131 ; Barclay, " Inner Life," pp. 361 ff.) 

3 Beck and Ball, pp. 253, 254 ; W. Tanner, " Lectures on the 
Early History of the Society of Friends in Bristol and Somer- 
setshire," London, A. W. Bennett, 1858, pp. 63 ff. 



The Eighteenth Century. 109 

sion which brought it about was the difficulty in 
determining who were the " poor/' and it was 
determined that : " All Friends shall be deemed 
members of the Quarterly, Monthly, and Two- 
Weeks Meeting within the compass of which they 
inhabited or dwelt the ist day of the Fourth 
Month, 1737 '' ; and " the wife and children to be 
deemed members of the Monthly Meeting of which 
the husband or father is a member , not only dur- 
ing his life but after his decease.*' ^ Such is the 
minute which fixed upon the Society the pecu- 
liarity of ** Birthright Membership.*' The vast 
importance of this step was not appreciated for 
some time. It changed the Society of Friends 
from a church of believers, at least in theory, to a 
corporation or association of persons some of 
whom always would be of those who were not 
spiritually minded. Youth had been no hindrance 
in the early days, provided the person was be- 
lieved to be spiritually minded ; after the adopt- 
ing of this regulation membership for a large 
number had no connection with change of heart. 
Another effect was to lessen the desire to proselyt- 
ize. It is still an open question with many 
whether ** Birthright Membership '* has not been 
an evil.^ 

1 Barclay, " Inner Life," p. 520 ; Rowntree, p. 112. It should 
be said that Friends from the earliest days have taken care of 
their own poor. 

2 See " Friends' Quarterly Examiner," London, 4th mo., 1872, 
p, 349 ; also R. Barclay, " On Membership in the Society of 
Friends " (answer to above article), London, Samuel Harris & 
Co., 1872. Some hold the view that the action of 1737 was sim- 



no The Friends. 

A rule similar to that of London Yearly Meet- 
ing seems to have been adopted in America about 
1755, when the revival of the DiscipHne took 
place. 

It remains to notice three important matters : 
two in which the Friends of the eighteenth cen- 
tury took the deepest interest, and one which was 
the cause of much suffering — relations to the 
Indians, relations to slavery, and the American 
Revolution. 

The feelings of George Fox toward the Indians 
have already been referred to. In his travels he 
held a number of meetings with them, and after 
his return from his visit to America wrote to 
Friends in that country urging them to preach 
the gospel to the natives.^ The early missionaries 
frequently had meetings with the Indians, and the 
intercourse between the natives and Friends was 
almost without exception friendly. Penn's treat- 
ment of them in the Jerseys and afterward in 
Pennsylvania is a matter of common history.^ It 

ply a declaration of what had been a custom, but there does not 
seem to be sufficient evidence for this position. By the " Con- 
stitution and Discipline for the American Yearly Meetings of 
Friends'* [Orthodox], 1900, "Associate Membership " is substi- 
tuted for " Birthright Membership." Part II., chap. II. 

1 " Epistles •' pp. 253, 425, 462, 477, 553. 

•^ Smith's "New Jersey," pp. 95, 144,533, etc. ; Proud, vol. i., pp. 
IQ4, 213, 300 ; vol. ii., p. 292 ; A. C. Applegarth, "Johns Hopkins 
University Studies," vol. x., pp. 450 ff. ; Colonial Records, Pa., 
vols, i., ii., iii. ; Winsor, vol. iii., pp. 473, 489 ; *' Historical Maga- 
zine," vol. vi., p. 64 ; " Journal " of John Richardson, Philadel- 
phia, 1783, pp. 123 ff. (an interesting description by a spectator 
of one of Penn s treaties with the Indians) ; " Journal " of Joseph 
Oxley, London, 1837, p. 323. 



The Eighteenth Century. iii 

is stated that from 1733 to 1751 £S^66 were ex- 
pended for the benefit of the Indians in Pennsyl- 
vania. Great efforts were made to prevent the 
sale of liquor to them, and to prevent cheating in 
trade. '* Strict amity between the Indians and the 
first and early settlers of Pennsylvania and New 
Jersey and their successors [lasted] for above 
seventy years.*' ^ The first serious hostilities 
were in 175 5, and were contemporaneous with the 
beginning of the retirement of the Friends from 
active political supremacy. The Friends did not 
cease their efforts for the amelioration of the 
natives. They were visited from time to time by 
traveling Friends,^ and in 1756 an association was 
formed for ** gaining and preserving peace with 
the Indians by pacific measures." Friends also 
believed it right to be present when treaties were 
being negotiated, to influence right treatment if 
nothing else. They were charged with abetting 
the Indian enemies of the province, and greatly 
slandered.^ The Meeting for Sufferings in Phila- 
delphia again and again had the condition of the 
Indians under consideration, it also addressed Epis- 
tles to them, and later established schools and mis- 
sions for them, the first near the New York and 
Pennsylvania boundary line near the Allegheny 
River; later still (1803) a mission was established 
at Tunessasa, which still exists (1905.) The interest 

J Proud, vol. iL, p. 325. 

2 John Woolmari, "Journal," p. 144 (1763). 

8 " The Friend " (Philadelphia), vol. xx., pp. 13 ff. 



112 The Friends. 

was not confined to Pennsylvania, but was mani- 
fested in Maryland, New York, and New England 
as well, where committees were appointed and 
active work done.^ 

The position of the Society as to slavery for a 
long time was, like that of the other religious 
bodies of the day, toleration. George Fox first 
came into contact with slavery in 1671 at Barba- 
does, and his heart was stirred up against the sin- 
fulness of the slave-trade and filled with compas- 
sion for the slave. He regarded the slave as a 
man, and plainly told the slaveholders that if they 
were in the condition of their slaves they would 
consider it '' very great bondage and cruelty.*' He 
also urged that negroes should be dealt with 
" mildly and gently," and after certain years of 
servitude be set free. His Epistles to America 
frequently urge upon Friends to preach the gos- 
pel to them, coupling them with the Indians.^ 
William Edmundson, in 1675, at Barbadoes 
preached to the negroes, and also told the gov- 
ernor that Christ had died for them as for all men.* 
William Penn in the articles of *' The Free Society 
of Traders'* (1682) provided for the freedom of 
negro slaves after fourteen years' service.* But, 

^ For an extended account see " North American Indians and 
Friends ... to the year 1843," London, Edward Marsh, 1844 ; 
Bowden, vol. ii., chap. iii. ; see also the various volumes of " The 
Friend " (Philadelphia). 

2 "Journal," p. 354; "Epistle" 355 (p, 406); "The Friend '' 
(Philadelphia), vol. xvii., p. 29. ^ " Journal," pp. 71 ff. 

* bowden, vol. ii., p. igo ; Watson'^ " Annals," p. 480 ; Penn- 
sylvania Magazine of History," vol. v., p. 45. 



The Eighteenth Century. 113 

like the Friends generally, he seems to have a- 
dopted the custom and owned slaves, and, through 
no fault of his own, died a slaveowner, his pur- 
pose and directions to set his slaves free not hav- 
ing been complied with.^ The negroes were well 
treated by the Friends, Penn particularly exert- 
ing himself on their behalf.^ But the most de- 
cided effort on behalf of the slave was made by 
the German Friends, already mentioned (p. 93), 
who at a "meeting at Germantown held the 1 8th 
of the Second Month [April], 1688,*' addressed a 
protest " against the traffic in the bodies of men,*' 
and against handling " men as cattle." To the 
monthly meeting this was *' so weighty *' that it 
was referred to the quarterly meeting, and further 
referred to the Yearly Meeting the same year, 
which records : *' A paper was presented by some 
German Friends concerning the lawfulness and 
unlawfulness of buying and keeping negroes. It 
was adjudged not to be proper for this meeting to 
give a positive judgment in the case, it having so 
general a relation to many other parts ; and there- 
fore at present they forbear it." This document 
is believed to be the first official protest of any re- 
ligious body against slavery.^ This action of the 

1 Janney, pp. 435 ff. ; Michener, p. 331 ; Bowden, vol. ii., p. 196. 
There are reasons for thinking that Penn's secretary took slaves 
for debt without his knowledge. 

* Proud, vol. i., p. 423 ; Michener, p. 336. 

3 Michener, pp. 331 ff. ; Bowden, vol. ii., pp. 192 ff. "The 
Friend " (Philadelphia), vol. xvii., p. 125 ; " Pennsylvania Maga- 
zine of History and Biography," vol. iv., p. 28, where the docu- 
ment is given in full. 
8 



114 The Friends. 

sturdy Germans was not without effect, for in 
1693 it was advised that no slaves should be 
bought ''except to set free/' and in 1696 the 
Yearly Meeting advised Friends ''not to encour- 
age the bringing in of any more negroes,*' and also 
that they should be brought to meetings, and in 
other respects well cared for. After this, at the 
instance of Penn himself, laws were passed by the 
Assembly designed to improve their moral condi- 
tion ; and after he had left, laws were enacted to 
restrict the importation of slaves into the pro- 
vince, and in 171 1 their importation was absolutely 
prohibited. The law was not, however, accept- 
able to the Council in England, and it was re- 
jected by that body, as was also another law im- 
posing a prohibitive duty of twenty pounds per 
head on every slave imported. The Pennsylvania 
Friends continued to agitate the subject among 
themselves, but though individuals and different 
monthly meetings felt strongly, the Yearly Meet- 
ing would not commit itself to any positive action. 
Among those who were earnest in the cause were 
Ralph Sandiford, who published a treatise against 
slavery in 1729, the eccentric Benjamin Lay, and 
Anthony Benezet, who were untiring in their 
efforts, by their lives, their speech and their pens. 
The most noted apostle of freedom to the slave, 
as well as the most attractive, was John Woolman, 
whose simple " Journal " has charmed thousands. 
To his faithful efforts was largely due the action 
of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1758, which 



The Eighteenth Centur}^ 115 

directed a *' visitation " of all who held slaves, and 
decided that all who should ** be concerned in im- 
porting, selling, or purchasing slaves '* should be 
forbidden to sit in meetings for discipline. It was 
not, however, until 1776 that slaveholders were to 
be " disowned '' (expelled) if they refused to man- 
umit their slaves. New England Friends in 1758 
and 1769 passed strong ** minutes '* in regard to 
slavery, and in 1772 Friends were *' disowned *' 
for not setting their slaves free ; in 1782 no slaves 
were known to be held by members of that meet- 
ing. In New York it was made in 1776 a discip- 
linary offense to buy, sell, or hold slaves. In Vir- 
ginia the steps taken were somewhat similar to 
those in Pennsylvania, but in 1784 meetings were 
directed to disown those who refused to manumit 
their slaves. Baltimore Yearly Meeting took 
similar action in 1777. ** By the close of the eight- 
eenth century there was not a slave in the posses- 
sion of a Friend in good standing except where 
slaves were held by trustees, and state laws did 
not allow them to be set free.** The interest in 
the negroes and in the slaves in the slave States did 
not diminish, but for the negro, as for the Indian, 
the Society has retained a deep interest ever since.^ 

1 Authorities for the foregoing paragraphs : " The Friend " 
(Philadelphia), vols, xvi., xvii. These articles were afterwards 
collected and published under the title " Brief Statement of the 
Rise and Progress of the Testimony of the Religious Society of 
Friends against Slavery and the Slave Trade, etc." Phila., 1843. 
Bowden, vol. ii., chap. viii. ; " Memoirs of Pennsylvania His- 
torical Society," vol. i., pp. 366 ff . ; A. C Applegarth, "Johns 
Hopkins University Studies,'* vol. x., pp. 447 ff. ; Clarkson, " His- 



ii6 The Friends. 

As in England so in America, Friends depre- 
cated any appeal to arms for the settlement of 
difficulties. Reference has been made to this in 
the case of Pennsylvania in 1755. In 1775 they 
took the same position. Besides their " testimony 
against war/' they had always upheld the doctrine 
of submission to the powers that be, where con- 
science did not forbid. It was therefore fully in 
accord with practice and principle that Philadel- 
phia Yearly Meeting should do all in its power to 
prevent its members from countenancing the ap- 
proaching warlike struggle with England. Ad- 
dresses were issued to its own members, and to the 
people at large, setting forth their views.^ In 1776 
representatives from New England, Virginia, and 
North Carolina attended Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
ing to consult on the course to be pursued.^ With 
few exceptions, the members of the Society every- 
where did their best to remain neutral, the object 
being to avoid all warlike measures. That they 
were in sympathy with the desires of the fellow-citi- 
zens to obtain redress of grievances is shown by 
the fact that in one of the non-importation agree- 

tory of the Slave Trade " ; John G. Whittier, " Introduction to 
Journal of John Woolman " ; Roberts Vaux, " Lives of Sandiford 
and Lay" ; "Journal" of John Woolman ; "Journal" of John 
Churchman ; Michener, pp. 328 ff. Allen C. Thomas, " Attitude 
of the Society of Friends towards Slavery in the Seventeenth 
and Eighteenth Centuries," etc. Papers of American Society of 
Church History, vol. viii, pp. 263-299, New York, 1897. It should 
be said that to the self-denying labor of John Woolman, w^ho 
visited Friends throughout America, is due more than to any 
other man, the action of Friends toward slavery. 
J Bowden, vol. ii., pp. 298-306. ^ Bowden, vol. ii., p. 307. 



The Eighteenth Century. 117 

ments of 1765 fifty of the signers were Friends. 
But it was natural that their testimonies and 
addresses against war and their peaceable habits 
during times of great excitement should cause 
suspicion, and that many should misunderstand 
their position. It is also altogether likely that a 
considerable number of the Society, particularly 
in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, really disap- 
proved of severing the bonds uniting the colonies 
with the mother-country. In consequence of 
these circumstances the sufferings of the Friends 
were great, especially so in Pennsylvania, where 
they might have expected more consideration. 
Refusing to serve in the army, their property was 
seized to pay for substitutes ; refusing to pay 
taxes levied especially for warlike purposes, again 
their property was seized. In 1779 or thereabouts 
the Assembly enacted a law requiring a test oath 
of all who taught school, which virtually shut out 
Friends from educating their own children, and 
their remonstrances had little effect. But the 
most aggravated case was the arrest and banish- 
ment to Winchester, Virginia, of twenty prominent 
citizens of Philadelphia, seventeen of whom were 
Friends, without trial, on false charges, as they 
and their friends insisted at the time, and as was 
afterward proved.^ 

To a greater or less extent the experiences of the 

' Friends still, in spite of the overwhelming proof to the con- 
trary, suffer from these unjust charges. See Winsor, vol. vi., pp. 
393> 417 ; Hildreth's " United States," vol. iii., p. 195. 



ii8 The Friends. 

Friends in Pennsylvania was that of those in the 
other States. In New England some supported 
the Revolution actively, justifying a defensive 
war, and in Philadelphia there were many disown- 
ments, and also a small separation on the same 
account in 1 781, where the separatists were known 
as the *' Free *' or " Fighting Quakers.'' ^ 

At the conclusion of the war relief came, and 
Friends loyally supported the new government.' 
Soon after the inauguration of Washington the 
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting sent him an address 
expressive of good wishes for the success of his 
administration, to which he replied in a pleasant 
and cordial manner.^ 

1 A meeting-house was built for them at Fifth and Arch streets, 
by " general subscription," in 1783, or, as the inscription on the 
building, which is still standing, says, *' Erected a.d. 1783, of the 
empire 8." The house is now occupied by a business firm. See 
Charles Wetherill, " History of the Free Quakers," Philadelphia, 
1894 (not published). 

2 See for the foregoing paragraphs, Bowden, vol. ii., chaps, 
xii., xiii. ; Michener, chap, xxxii. ; " Exiles in Virgmia " ; William 
Gordon, "American Revolution," vol. iv., p. 377 : " The Friend'* 
(Philadelphia), vols, xix., xx. ; New York Historical Society, 
" Collections," 1876-78 ; " Pennsylvania Magazine of History and 
Biography," vols, i., ix., xvi., etc. ; Howard M. Jenkins, " Histori- 
cal Collections of Gwynedd " (Philadelphia, 1884), p. 311, note. 

3 J. Sparks, " Writings of Washington, xii., 168;" Old South 
Leaflets, No. 65. 



CHAPTER V. 

DIVISIONS DURING THiE NINSTEl^NTH 
CISNTURY, 

[It should be remembered that the titles in this chapter are 
used simpl)^ for the purpose of distinction, and are those which 
are employed in the United States Census of 1890. As all di- 
visions claim the name of Friends, some course like this is 
necessary.] 

AMONG the incidents of the early years of the 
nineteenth century was the case of Hannah 
Barnard. This Friend, a minister of New 
York Yearly Meeting, duly accredited with cer- 
tificates from her home meetings, visited the 
Friends of Great Britain and Ireland in 1798-1801. 
She travelled extensively in Ireland, and appears 
to have promulgated doctrines closely allied to 
rationalistic. She also greatly aided the serious 
defection which occurred among the Irish Friends, 
1798-1803.^ 

She attended London Yearly Meeting in 1800, 
where she was the cause of much uneasiness to 
Friends. She applied to the Morning Meeting 
(Meeting of Ministers and Elders) for a certificate 
to visit the continent of Europe. Objections were 

> [William Rathbone], " Narrative of Events in Ireland." Lon- 
don, 1804. This book is wholly given up to the history of the 
separation in Ireland. 

119 



I20 The Friends. 

raised on the ground of "unsoundness" of doc- 
trine. Her case was referred to Devonshire 
House Monthly Meeting, within which she was 
considered technically resident. This meeting 
advised her to desist from preaching and return 
home. This she declined to do, and appealed to 
the Quarterly Meeting from the "censure and re- 
straint '* of the Monthly Meeting. The Quarterly 
Meeting confirmed the judgment of the lower 
meeting as did also the Yearly Meeting to which 
she further appealed. 

Hannah Barnard returned to America in 1801, 
declining to accept any pecuniary assistance 
toward the expense of her homeward journey.* 
Her case was taken up in her own meetings and 
she was disowned (expelled) in 1802. There 
seems to have been on both sides a great lack of 
the spirit of condescension and love.* 

During the latter years of the eighteenth and 
the earlier years of the nineteenth century the 
attention of Friends had been more engrossed 
with the enforcement of the Discipline, the carry- 
ing out of certain moral reforms, and with philan- 
throphy,^ than with questions of doctrine or with 



> It was usual for the English Meeting to pay the homeward 
passage of visiting ministers. 

2 For a full account of Hannah Barnard*s case, see " The York- 
shireman,'^ Pontefract, 1837, vol. v., pp. 17-31, 60-64, 70-77 ; Jan- 
ney, vol. iv. pp. 7-34, 93-96 ; [Rathbone] " Narrative " as above, 
pp. 106-109 ; see also Bibliography at the end of this volume. 

3 Some idea of the members and wealth of the American 
Friends at this time can be gained from the fact that in 1801-02 
the American Yearly Meetings sent to London Yearly Meeting 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 121 

evangelization. The elders and overseers gradu- 
ally exercised more and more authority, till they, 
with a few of the more weighty members, virtually 
controlled the Society. 

In a general way the reading of the Scriptures 
was encouraged, but it was before the time of 
low-priced Bibles, and quite a number of families 
did not own a copy, while others had but a por- 
tion of the book. ^ Some Friends only read it 
when inwardly moved to do so ; and some objected 
to " fixing times*' for reading, as being a lifeless 
form.* The lack of biblical knowledge which 
naturally resulted from this was not supplied by 
any definite teaching. Bible-schools were not yet 
known, and the task of instructing the children 
was left almost entirely to the parents, who too 
often did not attend to the duty, partly from the 
fear of interfering with the work of the Spirit in 
the hearts of their children.* 

The ministry was largely hortatory, and many 

" for the relief of their brethren in distress through the scarcity 
of provisions " ;£8285. o. 8. Of this sum Pennsylvania sent £S79^' 
15.7 ; New York £1375.4. i ; New England ;£928. 26 ; Maryland 
£182. 18. 6. " The Yorkshireman," 1837, vol. v. pp. 34, 35. 

1 In a circular issued by the Bible Association of Friends, an 
association founded by the Orthodox body after the separation, 
it was stated that in 1832 four hundred families were without a 
complete copy of the Scriptures, while one hundred and thirty- 
eight had not even a New Testament If this was the case with 
the body that laid the greater stress on the importance of the 
Bible, the condition of affairs in the other branch may be im- 
agined. See " The Friend *' (Philadelphia) vol. ii. ; pp. 413 ff ; 
vol v., pp. 268-270. 

* This was the view of Elias Hicks. (See Foster's ** Report," 
vol ii., pp. 420, 421.) 

» " Memoir of Rachel Hicks," p. 34. 



122 The Friends. 

meetings were held in absolute silence. While 
there is abundant evidence that there were among 
the Friends during the whole of this period able 
ministers and experienced Christians who were 
careful of the younger members, nevertheless the 
condition of spiritual life throughout the body was 
low, and a large proportion were Friends rather 
by tradition than conviction, and many were care- 
less and some unbelieving/ The soil was there- 
fore prepared for the introduction of almost any 
new opinions that might be plausibly presented. 

The Separation of 1827-28. 

[The literature on the Separation of 1828 is vohiminous, but 
most of it is strongly partizan. For this reason chief recourse 
has been had to Foster's Report of the New Jersey Trial, where 
statements respecting facts and doctrine were made under 
affirmation. The following, however, may be mentioned as au- 
thorities on each side : Hicksite, Elias Hicks, " Journal,'* New 
York, 1832 ; " The Berean," Wilmington, Del., 1825 ; " The Friend 
or Advocate of Truth," Philadelphia, 1828-30, 3 vols. ; Journal of 
John Comly ; " The Quaker," 4 vols., Philadelphia, 1827-28 ; Or- 
thodoxy **The Friend," Philadelphia, vols, 2-4, 1827-32 ; " Miscel- 
laneous Repository," Mt. Pleasant, O., vols. 1-4, 1827-32, Journal 
of Thomas Shillitoe, London, 1839, vol. 2.] 

The separation of 1827-28 sharply divides the 
earlier history of Friends from the later. The 
Society, which had till now presented an almost 
unbroken front, was to be rent into two parts, 
each sufficiently large to maintain a separate 
existence, and each claiming to be the original 
body. 

» The Journals of travelling Friends testify to this ; see " Life 
of Stephen Grellet," London, i860, vol. i., p. 97, 160, l6i. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 123 

The most prominent person connected with the 
separation of 1827-28 was Elias Hicks, an elo- 
quent and popular minister of Long Island, N. Y/ 
He was a man of powerful build, commanding 
person, and indomitable will. He had only an 
elementary education. His mind was strong, 
logical, intense, and practical, rather than broad 
or deep. His personal influence was great and 
lasting, and where he labored most his following 
was greatest. 

As his teachings became the subject of much 
controversy, it is necessary to go into them rather 
fully, in order that the reader may understand the 
ground taken by those who objected to him. It 
must be clearly understood, however, that that 
body of Friends generally called by his name has 
never formally accepted his doctrine, and many of 
its members hold very different views.* 



1 He was born in Hempstead Township, Long Island, N. Y., 
in 1748. His father joined the Friends soon after the birth of 
this son, and it is probable that Elias Hicks was received into 
membership about that time. He traveled much as a preacher, 
his last journey being w^hen he was eighty years of age. He 
died in 1830. (See "Journal.") For an able presentation of the 
man, see Watt Whitman, ''Prose Works," Phila., 1892, pp. 
455-476. 

2 Writers of all parties agree that for .a number of years, 
there w^as little that was radical in his teachings. Stephen 
Grellet, however, as early as 1808, "labored with him [Hicks]" 
because he " advanced sentiments repugnant to the Christian 
faith, tending to lessen the authority of the HoW Scriptures, to 
undervalue the sacred offices of our holy and blessed Redeemer, 
and to promote a disregard for the right observance of the first 
day of the week." Life of Stephen Grellet, London, i860, vol. i., 
p. T42. Hodgson, vol. i., pp. ff. The controversy arose in the 
latter part of his life. 



124 The Friends. 

There were two sides to his teaching : the prac- 
tical, which for many years formed the greater 
part of his preaching ; and the speculative. He 
was an ascetic, condemning all amusements, as 
such, saying that even to put on a ribbon to 
gratify one's self was to worship it rather than the 
Almighty.^ 

His central position was that " God is a Spirit," 
that a manifestation of his Spirit is given to every 
man everywhere, and that this alone, if followed 
and obeyed, is sufficient for his salvation. This 
thought so possessed his mind that he came to 
think that everything outward was not only non- 
essential, but carnal. He went to the logical 
extent of the theory, and held that the coming 
and work of Christ Jesus in the flesh, the Scrip- 
tures, and all outward teaching were to be classed 
among the outward things and therefore in no 
sense essential. The ** Light within ** was, he 
taught, the only light that any one need follow.^ 
The Scriptures can do no more than direct to this 
inward principle, and when they have done this 



1 " Philadelphia Sermons," p. 133. Over a thousand printed 
pages of his sermons were taken down stenographically and 
printed by M. T. C. Gould, but they all belong to the period of 
the controversy. While Hicks at first refused to assume any 
responsibilty for these (" Philadelphia Sermons," Advertisement, 
p. 4), he afterward expressed general satisfaction with them 
(" The Quaker," vol. iv., p. vii.), and near the close of his life 
writes that " in them all objections are answered in regard to 
my belief and doctrine." (" Six Queries, etc., to Elias Hicks, etc., 
with Elias Hicks's Answers." See Foster's *' Report," vol. ii., p. 
434.) 

2 " Philadelphia Sermons," pp. 80-82. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 125 

they have finished their work.^ He taught that 
they were the best of all books, and had been 
given by inspiration, and were only to be under- 
stood by inspiration, but that without this in the 
minds of the readers they were not only external, 
but had been productive of '* fourfold more harm 
than good/'^ ** The gospels contain a history, a 
great portion of which may be true/*^ 

The central cause of the controversy was his 
teachings as to the person and work of Jesus Christ. 
He taught that Jesus was superior to the rest of 
mankind because he had a greater work to perform, 
just as a man with five talents needs greater power 
than he who has but one.* Beyond this he taught 
that God placed Jesus on an equality with man. 
In his scheme Jesus was a man liable to sin, yet 
free from it on account of his obedience, so that 
at the time of his baptism in the Jordan he be- 

^ See Elias Hicks's " Answer to Six Queries," Foster's " Re- 
port," vol. ii., p. 432. 

2 " E. H. to Phebe Willis, 19th of 5th mo. 1818." (Foster's " Re- 
port," vol. ii., p. 417.) In a letter to the same individual, "23rd 
Ninth mo. 1820 " {Ibid., vol. ii., p. 420), he writes as follows : " But 
I may Add that I sometimes think that if they [the Scriptures] 
are really needful and useful to a few who make a right use of 
them, yet as I believe they are doing great harm to multitudes 
of others, whether it would not be better for the few who find 
Some comfort and help from them to give them up for a time 
until the wrong use and abuse of them are done away. ... It 
would be a very easy thing for divine Wisdom and Goodness to 
raise up and qualify some of his faithful Servants to write 
scriptures if he should think best, as good and as competent for 
the generation in which they lived, and likely would be much 
better, than those wrote so many hundred years since," etc. 

3 ** Philadelphia Sermons," p. 315. 

4 " Answers to Six Queries," etc., Foster's ** Report," vol. ii., 
p. 433 ; " Philadelphia Sermons," pp. 10, 11, 292. 



126 The Friends. 

came the Son of God, going through an experience 
in this respect that all of us must go through/ 
In his view, Jesus Christ died because he was 
killed by wicked men, just as any other prophet 
was martyred. While Hicks taught that his 
willingness to suffer was a pattern for us, he 
denied that the Father had sent the Son into the 
world to suffer, and he maintained that when the 
trial came Jesus had no alternative, he must be 
faithful and suffer, or lose his standing with the 
Father and not be saved with God*s salvation.* 
That the death of Christ is of any value to us be- 
yond the example of it. Hicks denied.^ 

It must, however, be borne in mind that Elias 
Hicks was not simply iconoclastic in his teachings. 
He believed that men are saved by the power of 
God, and he held that what he was presenting 
was the simple spiritual gospel, freed from all the 
man-made additions and externalities. He him- 
self states emphatically that he had experienced 
the power of what he was preaching about. There 
is a passage of much beauty in his journal in 



' "New York Sermons.** p. 96 ; "Philadelphia Sermons," pp. 
69, 70, 162. 2 '* The Quaker," vol. i., p. 16. 

3 Foster's '* Report," vol. ii., p. 424. As there are frequent 
references in his writings to Christ as the Saviour, the following 
passage from his ** Journal " will explain what he means by the 
term : " Therefore all the varied names given in Scripture to 
this divine light and life, such as Emmanuel, Jesus, sent of God, 
Great Prophet, Christ our Lord, Grace, Unction, Anointed, etc., 
mean one and the same thing ; and are nothing less nor more 
than the spirit and power of God in the soul of man, as his Cre- 
ator, Preserver, Condemner, Redeemer, Saviour, Sanctifier, and 
Justifier." (Journal," p. 330.) 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 127 

which he describes the kind of Saviour that man 
needs : one who is all the time with him to save 
him at the moment help is needed/ He seems to 
have thought that in order to emphasize the in- 
ward it was necessary to deny the outward. He 
distinctly admits differing from the first preachers 
in the Society of Friends on the subject of the 
atonement, maintaining that the light was not 
clear in their day on this subject, and they were 
not therefore to blame for not holding the broad 
views he thought were the true ones.^ 

The Orthodox Party. 

Previous to the troubles that immediately pre- 
ceded the separation, circumstances both in Eng- 
land and America had contributed to turn the at- 
tention of Friends particularly to the consideration 
of their position on the work and person of Jesus 
Christ. In the early years of this century 
the rise of the " New Lights " in New England 
drew away a number from the Society. They 
openly denied the divinity of Christ, and held not 
a few extravagant notions, which resulted in very 
disorderly proceedings, especially in Massachu- 
setts. They were finally after much trouble got 
rid of, and they came to nothing as an organiza- 
tion, having no element of cohesion.* 



' " Journal," p. 304. 

2 *' Letter to Phebe Willis, Ninth mo. 1820," Foster's " Report," 
vol. ii., p. 421. 

3 Hodgson, " History," vol. i., pp. 58 ff. 



128 The Friends. 

These events helped to arouse those who held 
or were inclined to, Evangelical views, to a sense of 
danger, and to the necessity of being increasingly 
careful in their statements and teaching to empha- 
size what they felt some had forgotten. With 
some slight difference of opinion they held to the 
simple statements in the Gospels concerning the 
miraculous birth of Jesus Christ and to his essential 
oneness with the Father and with the Holy Spirit, 
though they preferred not to use the word Trinity, 
as being non-Scriptural. While not calling 
the Bible the " Word of God,*' which name they 
reserved for Christ, they firmly believed in its in- 
spiration. While the Spirit was primary, they 
maintained that the Scriptures bore testimony to 
the Spirit and the Spirit to the Scriptures, so that 
to be completely furnished both are needed. They 
held that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross 
was necessary for the sins of the whole world, and 
that through this sacrifice the gift of the Spirit is 
given to every man that cometh into the world. 
They believed that the light of Christ shone into 
the hearts of all, and that every one would be 
judged according to the light given to him.^ 

The high esteem in which Elias Hicks was every, 
where held made opposition to him difficult, and 

1 The views here given are understood by writers generally 
to have been held by the Orthodox party, so it has not been con- 
sidered necessary to occupy space with references. Janney, 
however, is mistaken in thinking that they held extreme views 
on the atonement, or that those who afterward opposed Joseph 
John Gurney were inconsistent in not having indorsed Elias 
Hicks. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 129 

people were slow to believe that there could be 
any unsoundness in his ministry ; but gradually 
the opposition grew. One reason for its slow de- 
velopment was that his discourses were generally 
on moral themes. He also used many of the 
familiar phrases common at that time among 
Friends, and would teach what the Orthodox 
considered unsound in a few sentences only. His 
opposers afterward complained that in this way he 
misled many, who accepted his views uncon- 
sciously. They also accused him and his sym- 
pathizers of using expressions which sounded cor- 
rect but which were capable of other meanings.^ 

The Orthodox party found able supporters in 
English ministers, who about this time traveled 
extensively among Friends in America. The in- 
fluence of these ministers was great. It is not 
unlikely that in their earnestness of purpose they 
were not always wise, and they doubtless aroused 
opposition in some cases, where a more concilia- 
tory method would have had better results. 
Thomas Shilletoe, William Forster, Elizabeth 
Robson, and Anna Braithwaite were among the 
most prominent. 

^ John Comly, a leader among the " Hicksites " in Pennsylvania^ 
relates the following of himself. A Methodist minister asked 
him if he believed that Christ was the son of Joseph or the son 
of God ; he answered, ** The latter, undoubtedly," and also as- 
sented to the question as to whether we have access to God by 
his blood. The minister was satisfied, but John Comly adds • 
"Whatever external or material ideas he attached to the terms 
of his question, the answers were given with reference to the 
spirituality of Christ," etc, (" Journal " of John Comly, p. 350.) 

9 



130 The Friends. 

The trouble began in Philadelphia, and the sep- 
arations elsewhere were, due to it. There was on 
both sides an exceedingly strong admixture of 
personal feeling all through the struggle, which, 
however much it may be regretted, must always 
be borne in mind. The first open conflict of im- 
portance took place during the Philadelphia 
Yearly Meeting of 1823. This was occasioned by 
the question of sanctioning a document prepared 
with reference to a newspaper controversy, in 
which a statement of certain doctrines of the 
Society was involved.^ 

But the pivot of the whole movement was the 
clash between Elias Hicks and the Philadelphia 
elders. The latter were induced, by letters from 
New York, and also by statements of those who 
had heard him preach within the limits of Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting, where he was traveling 
with due credentials from his own meeting, to 
seek a private interview with him in relation to 
his reported unsoundness. To such an interview 
he finally acceded. But on meeting him they 
found a number of his friends present. This was 

' The publication was entitled " Letters of Paul and Amicus," 
first appearing in a Wilmington (Del.) newspaper, afterward 
published in book form. The document was prepared by the 
•' Meeting for Sufferings," and consisted chiefly of extracts from 
standard writings of Friends. It was distinctly Orthodox, and 
was objected to for doctrinal reasons, and for being in the nature 
of a creed. The opposition was so great that it was not adopted. 
The Orthodox Yearly Meeting afterward issued it. (Hodgson, 
vol. i., p. 134 ff.) For document, see also " The FYiend ** (Philadel- 
phia, vol. i., pp. 237-239 ; " Miscellaneous Repository " vol. i., 260- 
272. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 131 

not what they thought had been agreed upon, and 
so they withdrew. A correspondence followed, in 
which Elias Hicks did not satisfy the elders. It 
was held on the one hand that a minister traveling 
with the proper credentials was bound to be ac- 
cepted so long as he committed no disciplinary 
offense ; while on the other hand the elders claimed 
that their action was in reference to doctrines 
preached since his leaving home. Hicks, mean- 
while, finished his work in Philadelphia and re- 
turned to New York, with a written indorsement 
given him by one of the monthly meetings. So 
great was the feeling aroused that this latter meet- 
ing took steps to remove its elders on the ground 
that they had unjustly spoken against an *^ ap- 
proved minister '* ; while one of the quarterly 
meetings took measures to replace its representa- 
tion in the Meeting for Sufferings by those who 
sympathized with Hicks. Both these measures 
were extra-disciplinary and without precedent, the 
latter being contrary to a recent action of the 
Yearly Meeting. 

There were charges and counter-charges of in- 
fractions of the Discipline, so that party spirit ran 
high on both sides, and the real question at issue 
was obscured. One reason for the strong feeling 
which prevailed was that the Hicks party did not 
appreciate how deeply the Orthodox party felt in 
regard to anything which in their view tended to 
lessen the work of Christ. Doctrines, which to the 
" Hicksites *' were unimportant, to the Orthodox 



132 The Friends. 

were essential. The former did not object to in- 
dividuals holding them, but to insist on them as 
essential they could not understand. The result 
of this was that the opposition to Hicks was re- 
garded as personal, as arising from unworthy mo- 
tives, and as persecution. On the other hand, the 
Orthodox seem to have been unable to understand 
the motives of their opponents, and would show 
them no leniency. With such feelings between the 
leaders of the two sides, separation was inevitable. 
The Orthodox appear to have utterly failed to 
grasp the tendency of the times. The great move- 
ments in the direction of political and intellectual 
liberty that arose toward the close of the eigh- 
teenth century were having their effect upon the 
Friends. There was a spirit that rebelled against 
the authority of the elders, and proclaimed that 
the true principle of Friends was democratic.^ 
Elias Hicks undoubtedly appealed to this ele- 
ment. 

John Comly, of Byberry, Pennsylvania, appears 
to have been the first to decide that the trying con- 
dition of affairs could have no outcome but separa- 
tion. As the Yearly Meeting of 1827 drew on, he 
traveled in different parts of the territory of the 

^ Up to this time copies of the Philadelphia Discipline were 
almost exclusively in charge of the *' overseers and clerks," and, 
in the words of a member in 1825, they were *' kept as secret and 
as sacred the books of the Hindoos." (Preface to privately printed 
copy of Discipline, Philadelphia, 1825.) This was not peculiar to 
Philadelphia ; London Yearly Meeting did not allow individuals 
to have copies of the first edition of its Discipline. J. S. Rown- 
tree, Friends' Quarterly Examiner, 1898 (vol. xxxii.) pp. 469, 470. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 133 

Yearly Meeting^ and held conferences with those 
like-minded with himself, but found comparatively 
few ready for such a move. So it was determined 
to make one more effort to gain control. There 
seems to have been no thought of compromise on 
either side. The first thing was to secure the ap- 
pointment of a clerk to the Yearly Meeting who 
would be favorable,^ the present clerk being 
strongly Orthodox. The three quarterly meetings 
which sympathized with Hicks sent up decidedly 
more representatives than customary, in two cases 
double the usual number.* The representatives, 
on whom devolve the responsibility of nominating 
clerks, met, and had such a long and stormy ses- 
sion that the meeting at large reassembled before 
they had come to a conclusion. This, according 
to custom, resulted in the officers of the previous 
year retaining their places : they were Samuel 
Bettle, clerk, and John Comly, assistant. As the 
latter was privately arranging for a division of the 
body, he strongly objected, but was prevailed 
upon to act. The next morning he again objected, 
on the ground that there were two irreconcilable 
parties in the meeting, and proposed adjournment. 
No date being mentioned, this proposition was 
taken by many as meaning that the Yearly Meet- 
ing should be dissolved, so the proposition was 
not accepted. 



' " Journal," pp. 311 ff. 

2 See chapter on Organization, p. 13, 

3 Foster's " Report," vol. i., p. 332. 



134 The Friends. 

It IS needless to describe the sessions of that 
year. The sympathizers with Hicks were holding 
all the time private meetings perfecting plans for 
making " a quiet retreat from the scene of con- 
fusion," and at the same time taking part in the 
business of the meeting. Near the close of the 
sessions a proposition came in from the Women's 
Meeting to have a committee appointed to attend 
all the lower meetings with authority to assist and 
help them. This was being strongly opposed by 
the " Hicksites *' and some of the Orthodox, when 
a young man arose, and stated that he had attended 
the previous evening a meeting held by the sympa- 
thizers with Hicks, in which plans for a separation 
were being perfected. The information was so 
unexpected that some, as his report was not abso- 
lutely accurate, denied it. Others acknowledged 
it, and the committee was appointed.^ 

John Comly and his Friends held a conference 
after the Yearly Meeting had adjourned, and issued 
an address in which they stated that the funda- 
mental position of Friends is that ** GOD ALONE 
IS THE Sovereign Lord of conscience, and 
that with this unalienable right, no power, civil or 
ecclesiastical, should ever interfere/' They pro- 

> The last act of the united meeting was to agree to send 
money to North Carolina Friends to assist them to remove some 
free negroes out of the State who were in danger of losing their 
liberty. The quarterly meetings afterward contributed their 
various quotas through the regular treasurer, and this, in con- 
nection with the fact that the Yearly Meeting had been allowed 
to adjourn as usual, was held by the courts as evidence against 
the claim that the Yearly Meeting had been dissolved. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 135 

ceed to say that they feel bound to preserve it 
** unfettered by the hand of man, and unalloyed 
with prescribed modes of faith, framed in the will 
and wisdom of the creature/* They then explain 
how the unity of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting has 
been interrupted, *' that a division exists among 
us, developing in its progress views which appear 
incompatible with each other, and feelings averse 
to a reconciliation. Doctrines held by one part of 
Society, and which we believe to be sound and 
edifying, are pronounced by the other part to be 
unsound and spurious. From this has resulted a 
state of things that has proved destructive of 
peace and tranquillity. . . . Measures have been 
pursued which we deem oppressive, and in their 
nature and tendency calculated to undermine and 
destroy those benefits, to establish and perpetuate 
which, should be the purpose of every religious as- 
sociation.''^ Later on in the address they say: 
'* We feel bound to express to you . . . that the 
period has fully come in which we ought to look 
towards making a quiet retreat from this scene of 
confusion.*' At the same time they seem to antici- 
pate a time when peace might be restored, and they 
say that they have no new doctrine nor gospel 
nor discipline to propose. 

The Orthodox were not slow to make use of 
this address. They pointed out that in it feelings 

* Address " To Friends within the Compass of the Yearly 
Meeting held in Philadelphia." (Foster's ** Report," voL ii., pp. 
453. 454.) 



136 The Friends. 

averse to a reconciliation were acknowledged ; and 
that the Orthodox claim, that the troubles were 
caused by doctrines which the sympathizers with 
Hicks considered sound and the Orthodox did 
not, was distinctly admitted as the primary cause 
of the confusion. There was no complaint against 
the doctrines preached by the Orthodox. 

Later, the claim was put forward that the pro- 
ceedings of the Orthodox in controlling the Yearly 
Meeting had virtually dissolved it and had reduced 
it to its original elements, so that a reorganization 
was necessary. At the time, however, it is clear 
that the sympathizers with Hicks regarded them- 
selves as Separatists.* 

In June the ** Hicksites " called another confer- 



* Some months later, one of their prominent members, Halli- 
day Jackson, writes : ** We could never have calculated on such 
progress as has been made in so short a time." He says that 
by the autumn five of the eleven quarterly meetings had sent 
representatives, and that others had joined and that by spring 
all would have done so, though he admits that in all of them 
there v«?ere divisions of the meetings that would "adhere to the 
old establishment." His calculation that four fifths of the mem- 
bership would declare for his party was far too large, but there 
is no doubt that they had the decided majority, and it was on 
this, and on their freedom from doctrinal restraints, that they 
founded their claim to be the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia, 
and called the members of the " old establishment " separatists. 
(Foster's " Report," vol. ii., pp. 474, 475.) 

The numbers actually claimed by the " Hicksites" were 18,485, 
while they credited the Orthodox with 7344, and put down 429 
as undecided. The Orthodox disputed these figures, and claimed 
that there were not that number of Friends in the Yearly Meet- 
ing. Still, they admitted that the majority were with the " Hick- 
site " body. See Foster's " Report," vol. ii., pp. 461, 495 ; for 
*• Hicksite " testimony on the point, see vol. ii., p. 176 ; for the Or- 
thodox, see vol. ii., pp. 388, 399.) 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 137 

ence and issued another address/ in which they 
say, " To us there now appears no way to regain 
the harmony and tranquillity of the body, but by 
withdrawing ourselves — not from the Society of 
Friends, nor from the exercise of its salutary 
discipline — but from religious communion with 
those who have introduced, and seem disposed to 
continue, such disorders amongst us.'* They also 
propose to hold a " Yearly Meeting for Friends 
in unity with us, residing within the limits of 
those Quarterly Meetings heretofore represented 
in the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia." 
The call invited the monthly and quarterly meet- 
ings to send representatives to meet in Philadel- 
phia in October, *' in company with other members 
favorable to our views, there to hold a Yearly 
Meeting of men and women Friends, upon the 
principles of the early professors of our name,** 
etc. The partisan character of this call which 
practically excluded a large part of the member- 
ship, and the invitation to the monthly meetings 
to send representatives, which was undisciplinary, 
were further reasons given by the court in New 
Jersey for its decision in favor of the Orthodox 
party, who had continued without interruption to 
carry on their Yearly Meeting.* The proposed 

1 Foster's " Report,** vol. ii., p. 455. 

2 The " Hicksite " side is fully stated by Janney in vol. iv. of his 
" History," and the Orthodox by Hodgson in vol. i. of his " His- 
tory." The position taken on the legal question in the present 
sketch is that of Judge Ewing in his " Decision," Report of the 
Trenton Trial, pp. 1-27. 



138 The Friends. 

meeting was held and largely attended, and it was 
decided to meet thereafter in the spring just 
before the Orthodox Yearly Meeting. This 
Yearly Meeting, in October, was noteworthy in 
that it was attended by EHas Hicks, and that it 
had a direct bearing on the separation that fol- 
lowed in New York. 

Immediately after the undivided Yearly Meet- 
ing had closed in the spring of 1827, both parties 
commenced active operations, and in most of the 
quarterly meetings scenes more or less disorderly 
were enacted. The Orthodox, armed with au- 
thority from the Yearly Meeting, were firm and 
unyielding in their demand that all who had, as 
they said, separated from the body should be 
excluded from attending the meetings for busi- 
ness, and by this course greatly increased the 
number of the opposing party. There were pain- 
ful scenes also in connection with the possession 
of the meeting-houses. Officially, the " Hicksites " 
had taken and continued to take a very moderate 
position as to the property, advising their adher- 
ents to suffer wrong rather than disturb the peace.* 
This advice was not, however, followed, and al- 
though it is probable that the disorders were 
committed by younger members, who were simply 
members by birthright, the Orthodox maintained 
that the older members also were at fault. The 
*' Hicksites'* early in the struggle offered to com- 

' See " Green St. Meeting Address, Sixth mo. 1827, loth mo. 
1827.'* (Foster's " Report," vol. ii., pp. 457, 458.) 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 139 

promise the question of property on the basis of 
numbers/ 

The reason the Orthodox gave for the ground 
they took was that they regarded themselves as 
trustees for the property that had been placed in 
the hands of Friends for specific purposes, and 
that they were bound to see that those purposes 
were carried out ; that the question of numbers 
was not in the case, and that they could not 
divide property so that part of it would go for the 
support of doctrines they considered contrary to 
the fundamental position of Friends.^ The feel- 
ing was strongest in Philadelphia. In other places 
where separations occurred there was much less, 
and in New York and Baltimore the Orthodox 
have accepted propositions to divide the Yearly 
Meetings* property on the basis of numbers at 
the time of the separation, in each case the ** Hick- 
sites*' paying over to the Orthodox the amount 
agreed upon by both as being fair. 

In the succeeding New York Yearly Meeting, 
in the early summer of 1828, the presence of some 
of the members of the ** Hicksite ** body from Phil- 

1 The position taken by the Orthodox has been attacked 
sharply in '* Divisions in the Society of Friends," Thomas H. 
Speakman, Philadelphia, 1893, second edition enlarged. For 
accounts of disorderly proceedings in regard to meeting-houses, 
etc., see '* The Friend," Philadelphia, vol. i., pp. 15, 21, 28, 47, 61, 
etc. ; also " Miscellaneous Repository,** vols. 1-4 ; *' Trial of 
Friends in Philadelphia, June 1828," etc., Philadelphia, 1828. 

* " An Appeal to the Legislative Council, etc., of New Jersey, 
on Behalf of the Religious Society of Friends. Signed on 
Behalf of the Representatives, etc., Jonathan Evans, Clerk.'* 
Philadelphia, printed by Joseph Rakestraw, 1836. 



140 The Friends. 

adelphia precipitated a separation which appears 
to have been a foregone conclusion. The Ortho- 
dox refused to proceed with the business while 
those they considered ** disowned '* members were 
allowed to remain. Not being able to accomplish 
their wish, they with the clerk withdrew ; but not 
until considerable disorder had occurred was the 
separation completed.* They pursued the same 
policy, however, as was followed by the Orthodox 
in Philadelphia, and disowned all the ** Hicksite " 
adherents. Here the proportion of the member- 
ship was about two to one in favor of the '* Hick- 
sites.'' A separation followed in Ohio, which was 
the most disorderly of any. The " Hicksites** and 
Orthodox were about equally divided, the former 
being most to blame for the disorder.^ A few in In- 
diana sided with Hicks, but separated very quietly 
and not during the timeof the Yearly Meeting. In 
Baltimore Yearly Meeting at least four fifths of the 
membership went with the '' Hicksites.** The few 
Orthodox waited in the meeting till the adjourn- 
ment of the session that had so decided, and then 
organized.^ Though the feeling between the 
bodies in the last two localities was not so great as 
elsewhere, the Orthodox rigidly disowned each one 
of the " Hicksites.*' This was to vindicate their 
claim to be the only true body of Friends. Be- 

' "The Friend " (Philadelphia) vol. i., pp. 263-290, etc. 

2 E. Bates, " Miscellaneous Repository, Mount Pleasant, O., 
1827-29, vols, I and 2." 

3 '* Miscellaneous Repository," vol. ii., pp. 59-62, etc. "The 
Friend " (Philadelphia), vol. 2, pp. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 141 

sides this, the disciph'nary idea was very strong in 
those days. The *' Hicksites*' pursued a milder 
course. The consequence was that many of the 
undecided found themselves with the ** Hicksites/' 
especially when these were in the majority, for 
the wholesale cutting off of members could not be 
done with entire judgment. 

It will be seen that except in Indiana and Ohio the 
" Hicksites'* had a strong majority in each of the 
five Yearly Meetings where a separarion occurred. 
Nevertheless, taking the Society at large, they 
were in the decided minority, for there was no at- 
tempt to divide the Yearly Meetings in the limits 
of New England, Virginia, or North Carolina, and 
each of these, with the Yearly Meetings of London 
and of Dublin, declared in favor of the Orthodox 
bodies. There was, therefore, no Yearly Meeting 
that as a whole sided with the ** Hicksites,'' a point 
on which the Orthodox laid great stress.^ 

The first effect of the separation was to make 
matters worse rather than better, for lawsuits fol- 
lowed, mostly begun by the Orthodox. The 
most important, and one in which both sides 
brought forward their representative men, was the 
case before the Court of Chancery in New Jersey, 
in 1830, over some funds belonging to Chesterfield 
Preparative Meeting. The Orthodox based their 
plea on doctrine, usages of the Society, and legal 
points, while the " Hicksites ** refused to reply to 

* Foster's " Report," vol. ii., pp. 414. 



142 The Friends. 

any questions of doctrine before a civil tribunal, 
but rested their case on legal and technical points. 
Judge Ewing decided in favor of the Orthodox 
on legal points, and Associate Justice Drake gave 
his opinion to the same effect on points of doct- 
rine. The case was appealed, but confirmed by 
the Court of Errors and Appeals, which sustained 
the first decision by a vote of seven to four/ The 
chancellor, who was also governor, affirmed the 
decision, adding, with the consent of the court, 
his personal advice that the matter be settled 
amicably. This not being done, a bill afterward 
passed the New Jersey legislature, providing that 
an equitable division in accordance with numbers 
be made. This only applied to New Jersey. In 
Pennsylvania the ** Hicksites ** retained most of the 
country meeting-houses, while Orthodox retained 
Westtown Boarding-school, the Frankford Asylum 
for the Insane, and the bulk of the city property 
— by far the lion's share of the whole. Other 
lawsuits followed in other places.^ 

^ Janney says that all but one of those who voted in the affirm- 
ative afterward signed a paper stating that they did it on the 
legal ground taken by Justice Ewing. (Janney 's " History," vol. 

iv., p. 334-) 

2 There were two lawsuits in Ohio : one against the Hicksites 
for the possession of property, which was gained by the Ortho- 
dox ("Report of the Trial of Friends at Steubenville, Ohio, 
1829," M. T. C. Gould, Philadelphia, Joseph Harding, printer, 1828. 
For a caustic review of this "Report," see "Miscellaneous Re- 
pository," vol. 2, pp. 210 ff.) Another trial against the "Hick- 
sites," for riot, was at first decided in favor of the Orthodox, but 
on appeal to the Supreme Court was reversed on technical 
grounds. (See " The Friend," Philadelphia, vol iii., p. 15, " Miscel- 
laneous Repository/' vol. 2, pp. 9 ff. vol.3, 122, 222.) In New York 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 143 
The Wilbur-Gurney Controversy. 

Leaving for a future chapter an account of the 
progress of the Society, we shall now turn our at- 
tention to the other important schism that has 
occurred. In this the Orthodox bodies only were 
concerned. It differs from the separation we 
have just been considering in the longer period 
which it covers, and in the fact that the doctrinal 
points were more intricate, the question turning 
rather on disciplinary points and methods of ad- 
ministration. 

The effect of the separation of 1827-28 on the 
doctrinal position of the Orthodox bodies was to 
make them insist more strongly than ever on the 
deity and sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and on the 
authenticity of the Scriptures. The Orthodox 
Yearly Meetings, individually and collectively, 
issued declarations of their faith. 

In England a strong evangelical party called 
*' Beaconites *' arose in 1836.^ These advocated 
an extremely literal mode of interpreting the 
Bible. They were rather harshly treated, and a 
small secession took place. Though small it was 

the Hicks party gained their suit, the chancellor being unable to 
see any difference in doctrine or any sufficient plea for the 
Orthodox claim. In this lawsuit it should be said, however, that 
the Hicksites entered a statement of doctrines very different 
from those promulgated by Hicks. See " Summary Statement 
of Facts, etc., in Relation to the Property Belonging to the 
Monthlv Meeting of Friends in the City of New York," New 
York, 1838. 

1 So called from a small book entitled, " A Beacon to the Soci- 
ety of Friends," by Isaac Crewdson, one of the leaders. 



144 The Friends. 

important, on account of the high position in the 
Society of those who seceded.* 

A leading Friend at this time in England was 
Joseph John Gurney. He had written much on 
doctrine and in defense of the Society of Friends, 
and is the most prominent defender of their doct- 
rines since the early days. He was supposed to 
hold views very similar to those of Isaac Crewd- 
son, the Beaconite leader, and having been on the 
committee that condemned him, he came in for 
the share of abuse of both sides that moderate 
men generally receive. He possessed a most at- 
tractive disposition, was very charitable with his 
great wealth, and was deeply religious. At Ox- 
ford he had studied under private tutors ; he also 
came under the influence of Charles Simeon, anoted 
Low Church divine, and he moved in a circle that 
was at once refined and spiritual, and inspired by de- 
sires to raise their fellow-creatures ; for he was the 
brother of the celebrated Elizabeth Fry, brother- 
in-law to Sir Thomas Fowell Buxton, the anti- 
slavery leader, and was the intimate friend of 
Wilberforce, Clarkson, and others. He entered 
heartily into all their plans and arrangements, and 
was an active supporter of the British and Foreign 

* The literature on this subject is extensive, but is chiefly in 
pamphlet form. See, however, " Crisis in Quaker Contest at 
Manchester" (Isaac Crewdson), Manchester, 1837; "Quakerism 
Examined," etc., John Wilkinson, London, 1836 ; J. B. Braith- 
waite. Life of Joseph John Gurney, Norwich and London, 1855, 
2d ed., vol. 2, pp. 1-37, 58-63. The seceders numbered about 
three hundred. J. S. Rowntree, " The Friend " (London), vol. 40, 
P, 797. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century, 145 

Bible Society.^ Such a man was naturally held in 
high esteem among his friends, and soon acquired 
wide influence. His scholarly education and his 
mingling with able thinkers of other denomina- 
tions, together with his desire to spread the truth, 
as he understood it, among others than Friends, 
all contributed to make him depart considerably 
from the older forms of expression that had be- 
come obsolete to the general public. He was also 
more systematic in his modes of thought than 
Friends were then accustomed to be, and he un- 
doubtedly held more closely to the evangelical 
school of thought than most Friends before his 
day, laying great emphasis on imputed righteous- 
ness, though always insisting upon a righteous life 
following it. Some objected to the stress he laid 
on the Scriptures, on the sanctity of the Sabbath, 
and to his belief concerning the resurrection, as 
being legal and external. They also feared his 
learning and his close intimacy in certain forms 
of religious work with members of the Church of 
England.' 

John Wilbur, a minister from New England, 
visited Great Britain during the years 1831-33.' 

' He was born near Norwich in 1788, and died in 1847, from 
the effects of an accident met with while riding. 

*^ He was wrongly accused of denying the universal operation 
of the Spirit of Christ in the soul of man. See his remarks in 
** Observations on the Distinguishing Doctrines of Friends," pp. 
46-47, chap. I., " Addendum.'* 

sjohn Wilbur was born at Hopkinton, R. I., in 1774. His 
parents were elders among Friends, and he was educated very 
carefully and strictly in the customs and doctriens of the Society. 

ID 



146 The Friends. 

He noticed the rising of new methods of teaching, 
and new positions that were being taken in regard 
to doctrine, and was greatly grieved. He could 
not see how anything could be right that in any 
way tended to alter the formula used by the 
fathers of the Society. He met with a number 
who sympathized with him, and continued a cor- 
respondence with them after his return from 
abroad/ In 1837 Joseph John Gurney, having 
received the consent of the lower meetings, re- 
quested that of the Yearly Meeting of Ministers 
and Elders, to his undertaking a journey to Amer- 
ica to visit Friends and engage in religious work. 
A largely preponderating number of those present 
heartily approved of his purpose, but there were 
some who decidedly opposed on doctrinal grounds 
his traveling with their indorsement. They were 
not sufficiently numerous, however, to prevent the 
certificate being granted, but by their letters to 
America did much to influence the minds of John 
Wilbur and others against him.^ 

The difference between them did not concern 
what are considered the essentials of Christianity. 
Wilbur laid great stress on heeding the light 

He was disowned by the Orthodox for violation of the Discipline 
in endeavoring to injure the esteem in which J. J. Gurney was 
held, by circulating reports as to his unsoundness. His sympa- 
thizers soon after effected an organization and received him 
cordially as a minister. He died in the spring of 1856. (See 
** Journal " of John V^ilbur.) 

1 " Letters to a Friend " (George Crosfield), by John Wilbur, 
London, 1832. 

2J. B. Braithwaite, **Life of Joseph John Gurney," vol. 2, pp. 
71-74 (a copy of the certificate is given). 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 147 

within, and thought Gurney placed too much em- 
phasis on the importance of an outward knowledge 
of the facts of the work of Christ, though Gurney 
did not teach that these were essential to salva- 
tion. He objected to Gurney's position that jus- 
tification precedes sanctification, and maintained 
that a man is justified only as he is sanctified. 
The difference was really in the definition of terms, 
but the practical result of Wilbur's teaching is 
that the individual does not expect to know that 
he is saved. John Wilbur also objected to any 
method of religious instruction but such as was 
directly prompted by the Spirit at the time, and 
believed that the giving of lectures on religious 
subjects, or the distinct teaching of Bible truth, 
as is done in Bible schools, was work done " in 
the will of the creature.'* Gurney was active in 
supporting systematic Bible study, though he was 
as strong as any one in upholding the necessity 
for immediate qualification and direct guidance in 
the ministry of the Word. In these points Wil- 
bur was certainly nearer the Friends of the pre- 
ceding century than Gurney. In the early years 
of the Society, however, the custom of holding 
public prearranged discussions was prevalent, and 
these were more in line with Gurney *s methods so 
far as the principle was concerned. 

On Gurney's arrival in New England, John 
Wilbur waited on him in respect to his doctrines, 
and found him ready to enter into defense of them 
and to claim that they were according to the 



148 The Friends. 

Quaker standards. This convinced Wilbur that 
Gurney was unsound, and he traveled about to 
warn others of him, and wrote letters to Friends 
in various parts in the same strain. This called 
out remonstrances from the leading Friends in 
New England, and committees of his Yearly and 
quarterly meetings endeavored to induce him to 
desist. The position of the committee was that 
inasmuch as Gurney had come to them with full 
indorsements from the Yearly Meeting of London, 
It was not competent for them to go behind that 
certificate, but that they should accept him, until 
he made himself in some way amenable to their 
rules.* Wilbur, on the other hand, maintained 
that as Gurney had published to the world his 
doctrines, they were common property, and that 
he had a right to demand that his soundness 
should be investigated, as these writings had never 
been withdrawn. Neither side would yield, and 
the frequent conferences between the committee 
and Wilbur were fruitless.^ 

' It will be seen that the plea here was not unlike that used by 
the sympathizers of Hicks when the Philadelphia elders sought 
to interfere with him ; but the cases are not altogether identical, 
for Hicks had promulgated doctrines that caused alarm to the 
elders after his arrival in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, Gurney 
had not done this. Another great difficulty lay in this, that the 
Philadelphia elders did not have confidence in Hicks's home 
meeting, while New England Friends had unbounded confi- 
dence in the parent body in England. 

2 See J. Wilbur, ** Narrative and Exposition of the late Pro- 
ceedings in New England Yearly Meeting," etc., New York, 
1845 ; " Calumny Refuted " (an answer to the preceding), London, 
1845 ; " Narrative of Facts and Circumstances that have tended 
to produce a secession from the Society of Friends in New 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 149 

It is not practicable to give a detailed account 
of the troubles which led to a separation in New 
England and the setting up of a Wilburite Yearly 
Meeting in 1845. The Wilburites numbered only 
five hundred out of a membership of over seven 
thousand, and their claim to be the New England 
Yearly Meeting was decided against them by the 
courts on every count.^ 

Although the actual results of the separation 
were small as to numbers, its effects were wide- 
reaching. Each of the two bodies addressed Epistles 
to the other Yearly Meeting, thus bringing up the 
question of recognition, and thus risking a division 
in every meeting. None of the Yearly Meetings, 
formally recognized the Wilbur body, but all ex- 
cept those of Philadelphia and Ohio recognized 
the Orthodox. In these last two there was such 
a difference of opinion that they could come to no 
decision. The prevailing sentiment in Philadel- 
phia was one of sympathy with the Wilburites, 
but they were so much in the wrong from a disci- 
plinary point of view that their friends had not 
the strength to endorse their action.' In Ohio 
the matter came up in some shape almost every 

England Yearly Meeting," Providence, 1845; "Vindication of 
the Disciplinary Proceedings of New England Yearly Meeting 
of Friends," Boston, 1852. 
1 " Report of the Case of Earle," etc., S. C. Bancroft, Boston, 

1855. 

2 " Report of Meeting for Sufferings in Relation to the Facts 
and Causes of the Division in New England Yearly Meeting, in 
the year 1845." See also " British Friend," vol. 7, p. 253 ff. (doc- 
ument in full). 



i5o The Friends. 

year for nine years (i 845-1 854) the feeling grow- 
ing more and more strong, till it ended in a sepa- 
ration in 1854, over a disagreement as to who 
should be clerk, the larger portion going with the 
Wilburites. It is curious that even after the sepa- 
ration the Wilbur body of Ohio did not recognize 
that of New England until a generation later. 
In New York a small separation occurred in 
Dutchess County. 

A conference ^ representing all the American Or- 
thodox Yearly Meetings, except Ohio and Phila- 
delphia, met at Baltimore, Maryland, in July 1849, 
to consider *' the present tried state of our Society 
and to labor for its restoration to that unity and 
fellowship that formerly characterized it/' The 
conference after careful consideration issued a docu- 
ment reviewing the relations of the Yearly Meet- 
ings to each other, and expressing the conviction 
that any departure from established usage would 
be ** productive of very serious consequences/'* 
The conference met again in 185 1, and issued 
another document. This is much more definite 
in its statements than that of 1849. ^^ entered 
somewhat into the causes of the lack of harmony 

> The conference was proposed by New York Yearly Meeting. 
See Minutes of that meeting, 1848, pp. 23, 24. Notice was 
sent to all the Orthodox Yearly Meetings in America and also 
to London and Dublin. The last two declined to send delegates 
on the ground that it was not advisable for them to enter into 
the discussion of American affairs. 

* See •• Document prepared by Associated Committees of the 
Society of Friends who met in Baltimore in the Seventh Month, 
1849," Cincinnati, 1850. See also, ** Friends* Review," vol. 3, pp. 
641 ff., 760 ff., " British Friend," vol. 8, pp. 17-19, 100-102. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 151 

and advised and entreated Ohio and Philadelphia 
Yearly Meetings by name to recognize the 
" Larger Body *' in New England and open corre- 
spondence with it/ The conference then ad- 
journed. New England released its committee, 
but on the invitation of the other meetings ap- 
pointed a committee in 1852 to attend a confer- 
ence in 1853 *'if way opened for it/' The confer- 
ence was held in 1853 again in Baltimore, but 
" way did not open '' for the New England dele- 
gates to attend, so only New York, Baltimore, 
North Carolina, and Indiana were represented. 
This conference issued a brief report confessing 
its inability to recommend a practicable course 
which might tend to restore harmony among the 
yearly meetings. It then adjourned without 
day.' 

So far as differences of doctrine were concerned, 
it seems that there need not have been any sepa- 
ration. The Orthodox maintained that the action 
against Wilbur was disciplinary only, and not 
doctrinal. The " Smaller body '* insisted that the. 
doctrines which they are accredited to Gurney 
were at the root of the troubles and the chief oc- 
casion of them. There was an almost essential 
difference, however, between the attitude of the 



1 " Friend's Review," vol. 4, pp. 643 ff.; " The Friend " (Lon- 
don), vol. 10, pp. 119 ff. (document in full); "The Friend" (Phil- 
adelphia), vol. 25, p. 71 (reprinted in ** British Friend," vol. 10, 
p. 128. 

2 " Friends' Review," vol. 6, p. 694 ; Minutes of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting. 1853 ; Minutes of Baltimore Yearly Meeting, 1853. 



152 The Friends. 

two parties in regard to Christian work : the Wil- 
bur party being so afraid of what they called ''crea- 
turely activity/' that they confined their Gospel 
service almost wholly to their stated Meetings for 
Worship which were held largely in silence. The 
Orthodox party did this, but added to it other 
methods allowing for more definite and regular 
teaching. Both were active in philanthropic work. 

The separation in Ohio produced another shock 
throughout the Society, and again put every 
Yearly Meeting in danger of a division, for both 
meetings again addressed all the others, and each 
claimed recognition as the one true body. At 
the time, the two meetings were distinguished by 
the name of their respective clerks, the ** Hoyle 
Meeting *' being the Wilbur body, and the " Binns 
Meeting " the Orthodox. The '' Binns Meeting " 
was recognized by all the Orthodox Yearly Meet- 
ings on both sides of the Atlantic except Phila- 
delphia, which promptly recognized the '* Hoyle 
Meeting." As a consequence, Indiana, and North 
Carolina, withdrew from further correspondence 
with Philadelphia. In Baltimore a small separa- 
tion took place.* 

In its decisions regarding the later separations, 
London Yearly Meeting appears to have acted 
on disciplinary and not on doctrinal grounds. 
The small separation in New England in 1845, 

' See " Statement " issued by London Yearly Meeting, 1855, 
and by Baltimore Yearly Meeting, 1855, both reprinted in Min- 
utes of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 1855. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 153 

interfered in no way with theorganization of that 
Yearly Meeting, and as London Yearly Meeting 
understood that no doctrine was involved, it con- 
tinued its correspondence with the original body, 
taking the position of non-interference with the 
internal concerns of another yearly meeting. It 
therefore refused to recognize John Wilbur as a 
Minister when he visited England in 1853. When 
the separation occurred in Ohio in 1854, the case 
was different. Benjamin Hoyle had been clerk 
for a number of years, and there was a difficulty, 
from the technical point of view, in determining 
which party was the true Yearly Meeting. The 
matter claimed the consideration of the committee 
on Epistles, who reported in favor of the '* Binns " 
Meeting. London Yearly Meeting afterwards 
spent four hours in consideration of the subject. 
In its published statement it says that " no pro- 
posal was made for accepting, as the Epistle from 
Ohio Yearly Meeting, the Epistle signed by 
Benjamin Hoyle.*' The ground for accepting the 
Epistle from the "Binns*' Meeting was that the 
Friends who belonged to it had pursued the same 
course as London Yearly Meeting had done in 
recognizing the ** Larger " body in New England, 
and objecting to the presence of members from 
the " Smaller " body in their meetings for dis- 
cipline.^ 



* See " A Statement of the Proceedings of London Yearly 
Meeting, held in London, 1855, in reference to the Division in 
Ohio Yearly Meeting," London, 1855. 



154 The Friends. 

The pressure in Philadelphia of the sympathizers 
with the Orthodox bodies was soon so great that 
that Yearly Meeting, to avoid a separation in its 
own limits, was forced to abandon its recognition 
by way of correspondence with the Hoyle body 
in Ohio, and it gradually retired into the isolated 
condition it has ever since occupied. It allows 
members of each body, Orthodox, and Wilburites 
to sit in its meetings, and will receive certificates 
of membership from each, but will not receive 
ministers as ministers when they bring certificates 
of removal to reside within the limits of Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting. Since 1857 it has held 
correspondence with no other Yearly Meeting,* 
and while it allows ministers from either body to 
take part in its Meetings for Worship, it will 
neither read nor record their certificates, nor ap- 
point special meetings for them. Of late years, 
however, the meeting has begun to show evidence 
of greater openness, and its ministers have tra- 
veled both in America and in other parts of the 
world. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting is counted, 
although many of its members favor the Wilburite 
meetings, as belonging to the Orthodox section. 

The future course of the Wilburite Friends 
may be treated of here. They are perhaps the 
nearest representatives in the present time of the 
Friends of the latter part of the eighteenth century, 

* See ** Brief Narrative in Relation to the Position of Philadel- 
phia Yearly Meeting of Friends, Philadelphia, published in 
1872." 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 155 

except that they are less outreaching than they, for 
that was a time when many ministers traveled 
abroad. This may be partly owing to their small 
numbers, and also partly to their attention in 
spiritual matters being turned so exclusively to 
the past. 

The troubles resulting in the separation of 
1827-28 had been violent but comparatively short ; 
the new difficulties, from the very delicacy of the 
points involved, were much harder to deal with. 
Both parties suffered. The Orthodox party 
needed the balance and weight which the Wil- 
bur element would have afforded, while the latter, 
without the aggressiveness of the former, inevitably 
declined in numbers and influence. Their ex- 
treme attachment to the forms of a preceding 
age and the disposition to attach paramount im- 
portance to individual guidance, yet largely 
restricting this within lines determined by preced- 
ent, have had their inevitable result in further 
separation. They are in no sense a proselytizing 
body. They emphasize the weightier matters, 
and are very careful to maintain good works, 
though they do not much affect organized philan- 
thropy. Their meetings are held with a great 
deal of silence, and in the older meetings Bible- 
schools are not encouraged. It is understood 
that these are held in some of the more recently 
formed meetings, for about 1877 a number of the 
Conservative members in the Orthodox Yearly 
Meetings of Western, Iowa, and Kansas, becom- 



156 The Friends. 

ing alarmed at the rapid spread of innovations 
which had come in with revival methods, such as 
singing, the introduction of ** mourners' benches,*' 
•* human leadership *' in meetings, the preaching 
of instantaneous conversion and of instantaneous 
sanctification, etc., withdrew from the main body 
and formed separate Yearly Meetings. Their 
example for similar reasons was followed by their 
sympathizers in Canada.^ They now form a com- 
plete circle of Yearly Meetings of their own. 
Their main educational establishment is at Barnes- 
ville, Ohio. It is difficult to gain accurate statis- 
tics as to the progress of their membership. Their 
numbers in New England are greatly reduced 
in size. Even in Ohio, where they have their 
greatest strength, there has been a loss, and they 
are now far smaller than the Orthodox body in 
that State." 

It remains to state that there is still another 
body of Friends, known to the census as "Primi- 
tive.'' These are really ** Wilburite," but more ex- 

^ These new meetings with the older meetings made the body 
in 1890 number 4529 members in the United States. Including 
Canada, they have now seven Yearly Meetings, viz., New Eng- 
land, Ohio, Western (Indiana), Iowa, Kansas, and North Caro- 
lina (1904). At first they did not officially recognize one another 
by correspondence, but in time the practice of sending epistles 
was established. That these later formed Yearly Meetings are 
'* Wilburite " is shown by the fact of the correspondence with 
the older " Wilburite " bodies, and that the document issued by 
Philadelphia Meeting for Sufferings, 1849, in relation to the 
division in New England Yearly Meeting, was republished by 
the Kansas Separatists, in 1881, as a justification. 

2 The Friends who left Indiana Yearly Meeting at the time of 
the separation in Ohio are members of Ohio Meeting. 



Divisions in the Nineteenth Century. 157 

elusive and entirely independent. They number 
about two hundred and have separated partly 
from Wilbur bodies and partly from Philadelphia 
• Yearly Meeting on account of what they con- 
sidered the inconsistent course pursued by these 
meetings in not going to the logical extent of 
their position. William Hodgson, the historian, 
whose work is frequently referred to in these 
pages, was a member of this branch. His ** His- 
tory '' gives a full account of their rise and prog- 
ress. The chief interest of these Friends is to 
" maintain the ancient testimonies of the Society *' 
intact, with the idea of bearing witness to the 
spirituality of the gospel rather than of propa- 
gating it. 



CHAPTER VI. 

PIBRIOD OF R^ORGANIigfATION— FURTHER 
PROGRESS. 

AS soon as the separation of 1827-28 was over 
both Orthodox and ** Hicksites *' began to 
strengthen the things that remained, and 
to go forward as best they could under the some- 
what crippled conditions in which they found them- 
selves. Many heartily regretted the separation. 
Nearly thirty years after, Samuel Bettle, who had 
been the clerk of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting at 
the time of the separation in that meeting, and 
who had sided with the Orthodox party, publicly 
stated that he believed patient labor and suffering 
would have been better than division.^ A careful 
study of the times can hardly fail to lead to the 
same conclusion. The Society, never very numer. 
ous, presented thereafter a broken front with dimin- 
ished influence. That some members would have 
been lost in any case is probable, but the same 
Book of Discipline continued to be used by the 
" Hicksites,*' with the clauses making it a disown- 
able offense to deny the authenticity of the Holy 
Scriptures and the divinity of Jesus Christ.^ 

^ Hodgson, vol. ii., pp. 219, 220. 

2 A revision of the Discipline in their Baltimore Yearly Meeting 
lias removed the clauses relating to disownment, and somewhat 
weakened the doctrinal statements. 



i6o The Friends. 

The leaders who agreed with Hicks held views 
very different from the Orthodox ; but many of 
those who followed them did so in order to main, 
tain what they felt was right liberty. In the 
Yearly Meetings of New York, Philadelphia, and 
Baltimore, where their great strength lay, theirs 
was the popular party. This fact became their 
strength and their weakness, for while they gained 
numbers they also received the larger proportion 
of those who had no settled convictions, but who 
went with the current. Most of those who sided 
with the Orthodox did so from personal convic- 
tion, and therefore added strength to them. Many 
on both sides, however, adopted the course they 
took from social and family motives. 

The '' Hicksiiesr 

As has been said, it would be most unjust to 
credit Hicks's doctrines to even a majority of those 
who are popularly called by his name. Their 
fundamental principle was that in matters of 
doctrine there should be the fullest liberty. They 
therefore freely accepted Hicks and indorsed him 
as a minister without thereby assuming to adopt 
his opinions.^ The first effect of the separation 
on them, however, at least in Philadelphia, seems 
to have been to cause a reaction in favor of more 

1 The Orthodox claimed that by this action they virtually took 
the ground that belief as to the outward appearing and work of 
Jesus Christ is a matter of indifference, and thereby opened the 
door for and even invited unbelief. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. i6i 

" orthodox** teaching. At all events, they ad- 
dressed an Epistle to London Yearly Meeting in 
1830/ in which they protest that they hold essen- 
tially the same doctrines as they had always held, 
and that English Friends have misjudged them 
on ex parte testimony. They claim that the dis- 
sensions have not been caused by doctrinal dif- 
ferences so much as by the " exercise of an op- 
pressive authority in the church/' They also 
claim to accept the Scriptures with their record 
of Jesus Christ, and the fundamental principle of 
the light of Christ within, as God*s gift for man's 
salvation, and all the blessed doctrines which 
grow from it as their root. They end by referr- 
ing to their large majority over the other branch.* 
An Epistle issued by London Yearly Meeting in 
1829 explains the position of that Yearly Meeting 
at that time. After saying: *' This meeting has 
been introduced into a feeling of much sympathy 
and brotherly love for our brethern on the Ameri- 
can continent,'* the Epistle proceeds to declare 
the faith of Friends in the inspiration and divine 
authority of the Holy Scriptures, and in the 

1 " Journal " of John Comly, Appendix, p. 638 (containing a 
copy of the Epistle). 

2 This Epistle was not sent without earnest protest. The clerk 
of the Woman's Meeting at the time, the afterward celebrated 
Lucretia Mott, opposed it very positively, on the ground that " it 
contained sentiments utterly opposed to her own convictions, and 
to what she believed to be the inherent spirit of Quakerism." 
She was overruled, but signed it in her official capacity. She was 
so far justified by the fact that the document was not read in 
London Yearly Meeting at large, and was returned in a rather 
peremptory manner. ('' James and Lucretia Mott," p. 167, and 
note.) 

II 



1 62 The Friends. 

person and work of Jesus Christ, as the propitia- 
tion and sacrifice for sin as well as the Light 
which lighteth every man that cometh into the 
world. It then goes on to say ** Our religious 
Society, from its earliest establishment to the 
present day, has received these most important 
doctrines of Holy Scripture in their plain obvious 
acceptation ; and we do not acknowledge as in 
fellowship with us, as a Christian community, any 
body of religious professors which does not thus 
accept them, or which openly receives and ac- 
credits as Ministers, those who attempt to invali- 
date any of these doctrines which we esteem as 
essential parts of the Christian Religion/' 

Memoirs of prominent members of the Society 
about this time show that the doctrinal question 
was by no means settled. Lucretia Mott herself 
met with serious opposition on account of her 
views, which were almost rationalistic. But any 
" orthodox '* reaction was overpov/ered, and the 
era of freedom of expression on points of doctrine 
was established.^ 

^ Edward Hicks, one of their prominent ministers at the time 
of the separation, writes in 1840 complaining of the growing 
power of the Unitarian element, and says that Elias Hicks never 
meant to introduce this, but only to prevent Friends from running 
to the opposite extreme of Trinitarianism ; that before his death 
the old man, seeing how things were going, had said that he was 
more afraid of his professed JB'riends than his professed enemies. 
" But," adds Edward Hicks, *' had he lived till now, he w^ould 
have found gallery members of his branch of Friends having less 
reverence for Jesus Christ than the Turks, and have heard one 
of their prominent ministers declare from a Quaker gallery that 
a Romaa Catholic priest in Ireland had done more good than 
ever Jesus Christ had done." (" Memoirs " of Edward Hicks.) 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 163 

Lucretia Mott was probably the ablest repre- 
sentative of the extreme radical school of thought 
in the Society. She worked in connection with 
the Free Religious Association, was a member of 
the Anti-Sabbath Association, and appeared to 
have grave doubts on the subject of the future 
life. Her statements concerning Jesus Christ are 
most radical, and she took the ground that the 
Bible was a dangerous book. She had, however, 
great faith in righteousness, and labored with 
persistent zeal and untiring perseverance on behalf 
of the slave, often enduring no little opposition 
and sometimes being in danger of violence. 
Nothing could daunt her in this work, and she 
lived down opposition both inside and outside of 
her Society. It was undoubtedly her strong and 
successful efforts on behalf of the negro that 
served to turn the attention of her fellow-members 
from her radical doctrines and to give her the 
great place in their love and esteem which she 
attained during the latter years of her life.^ 

There has always been a minority of Friends 
belonging to this branch who entertain views 
closely approximating evangelical doctrines ; so, 
in full accord with the foundation principle of 
freedom which underlies the " Hicksite ** branch 
of the Friends one can hear very differing views 
advocated in the same meeting. As a body this 

^ See " Life of James and Lucretia Mott." She was the 
daughter of Thomas and Anna Coffin, and was born in Nan- 
tucket, 1793; she married James Mott, Jr., in 1811, and died in 
1880. 



164 The Friends. 

branch has given special attention to philanthropy 
and moral reform. First for the slave, and now 
for peace, total abstinence from alcoholic bever- 
ages, and other movements for the uplifting of 
humanity, their members, both in their corporate 
capacity and individually, have been active and 
efficient. In the field of literature, Samuel M. 
Janney, a prominent minister in Loudoun County, 
Virginia, is acknowledged to have produced the 
most authoritative life of William Penn that has 
appeared.^ 

This branch of the Friends has been much 
interested in education, having had under the 
care of their members, and still having, a number 
of institutions for learning, of all grades.^ One of 
the earliest of these was the Alexandria Boarding- 
school in Virginia, under the charge of Benjamin 
Hallowell. It was opened in 1824, and continued 
thirty-four years. Many sons of slave-owners were 
in attendance. The school attained wide celebrity, 
especially for its superior instruction in advanced 

1 Orthodox Friends take exception to his " Life of George 
Fox '* and to the doctrinal parts of his " History of Friends," as 
not giving sufficient weight to the evangelical views of early 
Friends. His section on the causes of the separation is a very 
able production, but is far from being an impartial account. 

2 A great deal of the information concerning the educational 
institutions among Friends of both branches is gathered from an 
able account of them by Edward H. Magill, LL.D., late president 
of Swarthmore College, Pa., which is to be found in ** The Pro- 
ceedings of the PViends' Religious Congress, Chicago, 9th mo., 
1893." C' Hicksite " Conference.) Almost the only criticism on 
the paper that can be made is that he writes as if all the institu- 
tionswere under one body, a method which is very likely to cause 
confusion in the mind of a reader who is not acquainted with 
the particulars. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 165 

mathematics. General Robert E. Lee and 
General Kirby Smith were among the students. 
Benjamin Hallowell was also a prominent minister, 
and was greatly esteemed for his high character 
and abilities. A very important school, con- 
sidered by some as the precursor of Swarthmore 
College, was begun in 1838 by John and Rachel 
Jackson, near Darby, Pa. It was among the first 
which offered advanced educational privileges to 
young women. John Jackson imported the largest 
refracting telescope owned at the time by any in- 
dividual in the United States. Since 1845 there 
has been a day-school for boys and girls under 
the care of the three monthly meetings in Phila- 
delphia. It now numbers six hundred pupils, and 
is a very thorough institution. Its students, who 
belong to all denominations, regularly attend with 
their teachers the midweek meeting for worship. 
Other schools which may be mentioned are : 
Friends* Seminary, New York (1861), Friends* 
School in Brooklyn (1867), which together have 
an endowment of $100,000 ; Friends* Elementary 
and High School, Baltimore, Md. (1864), and the 
George School (1893) at Newtown, Pa. By the 
will of the late John M. George, of Overbrook, 
Pennsylvania, about $750,000 has been left for 
this school. The grounds contain 227 acres, and 
suitable buildings have been erected at an entire 
cost of $150,000. It is a coeducational boarding- 
school, and has scientific, classical, and literary 
courses. 



i66 The Friends. 

Their leading educational institution is Svvarth- 
more College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, founded 
in 1869. It is under the management of members 
of the body, both men and women being on the 
board. The value of land and buildings, apparatus, 
etc., is estimated at over half a million dollars, and 
its permanent endowment fund is about the same. 
The instruction is liberal and thorough. The 
main building was totally destroyed by fire in 188 1, 
but was restored in one year by the subscriptions 
of Friends without incurring any debt. In 1905 
over $600,000, was added by private subscriptions 
to the endowment of the college. Its influence on 
other schools in the Society is great, and many of 
them, for we have only mentioned a few of the 
number, arrange their courses to enable their 
students to enter the freshman class at Swarthmore 
on certificate of the principal. The Indian work 
of the Society will be treated in connection with 
that of the Orthodox body. 

The number of the *' Hicksite '' body is set down 
in the census of 1890 was 21,992.^ They are ex- 
clusively confined to the United States and Can- 
ada, and are divided into seven Yearly Meetings, 
viz.. New York, Genesee (Western New York and 
Canada), Philadelphia, Baltimore, Ohio, Indiana, 
and Illinois. Of these Genesee and IlHnois have 
been established since the separation. Philadel- 
phia Yearly Meeting, comprises more than half 
the entire membership. Their numbers have 

1 This of course does not include the members in Canada 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 167 

seriously declined, for in 1830 they claimed to 
have a combined membership of 31,000 and over, 
in the Yearly Meetings of New York and Phila- 
delphia alone.^ Their other Yearly Meetings 
could not have aggregated less than six or seven 
thousand at that time, and were probably more. 
According to the latest available statistics and 
estimates the total membership is (in 1905). 20,848. 

Of recent years there has been a revival of a 
feeling for the support and spread of their views. 
An enthusiastic conference on philanthropic work 
was held in 1892 at Goose Creek, Lincoln, Lou- 
doun County, Va., attended by delegates from all 
parts. Their conference at the Congress of Re- 
ligions at Chicago in 1893 was a great success.' 
They have flourishing ** First-day schools,'* some 
of which have adopted the International Lessons, 
and others a series of lessons selected and prepared 
by a Central Committee of their own body. They 
have been very successful in forming social and 
literary organizations which interest and hold 
their younger members. 

The latest statement of their doctrine was given 
by Howard M. Jenkins, late senior editor of the 
" Friends' Intelligencer '* of Philadelphia, in his 
'* Statement of the Faith of Friends '* ^ at the Con- 



1 Foster's " Report," vol. ii., pp. 461-464. 

2 j^ee next chapter. 

2 ** Proceedings of the Religious Congress of Friends in the 
World's Parliament of Religions, Chicago, 1893," p. 22. See also 
" What Makes a Friend," " Chautauquan," April, 1894, by John 
J. Cornell. 



i68 The Friends, 

gress in Chicago. Without giving the statement 
in full, we may say that they hold that God 
'* directly reveals Himself to the perceptions of 
man ; that his light shines into our souls, if we 
admit it, and becomes thus * God's gift for man's 
salvation.* The Scriptures confirm this immediate 
revelation, and record the visitations of God to 
the souls of men in past ages,'' and present us 
with the truths of the Christian dispensation. 
" We therefore," he says, ** revere the Scriptures, 
and desire to become possessors of the truth they 
contain." This is to be accomplished through the 
same Spirit by which they were given forth. On 
the divinity of Christ he says: ** Convinced that 
the divine nature, the Christ spirit, the Word 
* which was in the beginning,* dwelt in Jesus in an 
unparalleled and, to our finite perceptions, an 
immeasurable degree, we regard him (as John G. 
Whittier has formulated it) as * the highest pos- 
sible manifestation of God in man.* "^ There is 
no statement of their belief as to salvation through 
Christ Jesus. 

The Orthodox. 

In the Yearly Meetings of New England, Vir- 
ginia,^ and North Carolina there was no break in 

^ It seems but justice to John G. Whittier, who was a member 
of Orthodox Friends, to say that, while he was full of universal 
love and recognized the good in all, he distinctly accepted the 
orthodox view of Christ Jesus, as he personally assured the 
writer of this sketch. 

2 The meetings in Virginia in w^hich a separation took place 
belonged to Baltimore Yearly Meeting, and still do so. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 169 

the progress of events, as no separation had oc- 
curred in them. In the remaining Yearly Meet- 
ings, one of the first things done was the appoint- 
ment of committees by the Yearly Meetings to 
go throughout the territory under their care, and 
bring together the weak-hearted, and, where 
necessary, organize new meetings. A great deal 
of difficulty was felt in the fact that both bodies 
claimed the title of the Society of Friends, so that 
there was no easy way of distinguishing them. 
It is largely to this cause that must be attributed 
the long survival of unpleasant feeling that even 
now, after a lapse of nearly eighty years, has not 
quite died out. Many of the meetings of the Or- 
thodox adopted as their official title, in addition 
to their previous name, " in unity with the ancient 
Yearly Meetings of Friends,*' and were incorpo- 
rated in this way.^ 

Soon after the separation a conference met in 
Philadelphia composed of delegates from each of 
the Orthodox Yearly Meetings on the Continent, 

1 Thus the incorporated name of Baltimore Monthly Meeting 
(Orthodox) is " Baltimore Monthly Meeting of Friends for the 
Eastern and Western Districts, in unity with the ancient Yearly 
Meetings of Friends." The last clause is now generally omittecl, 
and for practical use is almost entirely given up. 

Another means, employed by both sections, is the appointment 
of correspondents, who are well-knowm Friends, whose duty it is 
to indorse all official documents issued to other Yearly Meetings 
as evidence of their genuineness. They have no other duties 
except this and to receive the communications from other 
meetings and hand them over to the proper officers. The Or- 
thodox body has now generally accepted the title of Orthodox, 
though unofficially, except in the case of Baltimore Yearly 
Meeting. Some of the western Yearly Meetings have changed 
their name to " Friends' Church.** 



i7o The Friends. 

which issued a Declaration of Faith. This was 
accepted by all the Yearly Meetings as a statement 
of their belief, but not in any sense as a binding 
creed, and it is now only an interesting presenta- 
tion of the ground then taken by Friends/ 

In 1830 the Friends in Philadelphia formed a 
Bible Society, which soon had branches in differ- 
ent parts of the country, and did a great work in 
supplying Bibles at moderate cost to the member, 
ship.^ About the same time, Hannah C. Back- 
house, of England, visited America (1830-35) in 
company with her husband, Jonathan Backhouse, 
also a minister. She found much neglect of the 
Bible among American Friends, a matter of great 
sorrow to her, and she established the first Bible- 
schools among them.^ The movement was not 
rapid at first, but for many years such schools have 
been almost universal in this branch of the Friends. 
Most of the schools use the International Lessons, 
and all the Yearly Meetings except one have stand- 
ing committees whose duty it is to encourage and 
help the schools in the various localities.* 

The separation had also the effect of arousing 
the literary activity of the members. In Phila- 

1 " The Testimony of the Society of Friends on the Continent 
of America," New York, printed by Richard and George S. 
Wood, 1830 (36 pp.). 

2 See note, p. 121. 

3 " Few can estimate the value of H. C. Backhouse's labors in 
America, and the permanent results which have followed, and are 
still developing " (nearly twenty years later). (" Journal and 
Letters of H. C. Backhouse," p. 133.) 

^ Except in some points of method, these schools are very 
similar to the Sunday-schools of other denominations. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 171 

delphia Thomas Evans issued an ** Exposition " 
of Friends* doctrines, dwelling chiefly on the tes- 
timony of the earliest Friends to the divinity of 
Christ and his salvation. He and his brother 
William soon after edited very ably a series of 
volumes entitled '' Friends* Library/* in which 
were reproduced, in a rather more modern form, 
the lives and writings of many of the early worth- 
ies of the Society. The work reached to fourteen 
volumes. About the time of the separation the 
weekly periodical known as ** The Friend ** (Phil- 
adelphia) was established, and is now the oldest 
periodical published anywhere under the name 
of Friends. It represents the conservative ele- 
ment of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. There has 
been no appreciable change in its shape, size, or 
appearance during its existence of nearly eighty 
years. 

There was for a number of years following 1828 
much ministerial activity, and a number of minis- 
ters traveled up and down the country visiting the 
congregations of Friends, and also holding meet- 
ings to some extent with the public. Among 
these ministers was Stephen Grellet, ** at modern 
apostle/* as he has been termed, whose life is one 
of the most remarkable, not only among the 
preachers of his own denomination, but of all de- 
nominations in the nineteenth century.^ The in- 
fluence of the traveling ministers can hardly be 

1 See •' Life of Stephen Grellet," by B. Seebohm, London, i860; 
R. G. Horton, '* Verbum Dei," p. 64, London, 1893. 



172 The Friends. 

overestimated. It served to maintain many a 
small congregation in hope and life, and also to 
arouse many who were not in membership, and 
though, owing to special reasons, there was little 
effort made to proselytize, yet the religious in- 
fluence exerted by these preachers on persons out- 
side the Society has been great. 

The chief influence exerted by the Friends, as 
it has been mentioned in regard to the organiza- 
tion, was in the careful and just lives of their mem- 
bers. The Quaker character became proverbial 
for probity, and it would be difificult to find any 
movement that promised on right lines to benefit 
man that had not received support from Friends to 
an extent out of all proportion to their numbers. 

We have seen how they liberated their slaves 
at a time when the consciences of the Christians 
of the country at large were quite asleep on the 
subject. Their efforts on behalf of the negro did 
not stop here, but they immediately began to try 
to influence society around them to see the ini- 
quity of slavery. Their method was entirely 
moral suasion, and not political action ; and they 
confined themselves to petitioning legislatures, to 
appeal, and to personal influence so far as the 
masters were concerned ; and in regard to the 
slaves, they refused to countenance the evil system 
in any way that they could possibly avoid. They 
would not hire slave labor. Many of them re- 
fused to buy slave-grown or slave-produced arti- 
cles. When they saw any case of peculiar distress 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 173 

where families were being separated by being 
sold away from one another, the Friends as far as 
they could would buy them in, and then arrange 
for their freedom, the freed negro frequently, by 
working on part wages or by saving, repaying the 
money spent for him. Many of the Friends took 
great interest in the religious and intellectual de- 
velopment of this race, and in States where it was 
illegal for colored people to hold gatherings with- 
out the presence of some white persons, they 
would not infrequently attend regularly, for the 
chief purpose of affording them an opportunity 
to hold meetings in their own way, though very 
often the Friends also would have something to 
say. Others, at the risk of imprisonment if dis- 
covered, taught continuously through a series of 
years in night-schools for colored persons held 
privately for fear of detection. In these quiet 
ways, with great diligence and patience, the 
Friends labored in a movement entirely distinct 
from what is now known as the political abolition 
movement. When this arose the body of Friends 
greatly regretted it, and for a number of years re- 
fused to sanction what they felt to be a move- 
ment with good purposes, but using methods in- 
consistent with the peaceable religion of Christ. 
Ofificially, none of the Yearly Meetings, so far as 
known, ever sanctioned any political party. Soon, 
however, the fire of the new crusade aroused 
many earnest Friends, and they began to sympa- 
thize and labor together with the abolitionists. 



174 The Friends. 

This aroused even more opposition in the Ortho- 
dox than it had in the Hicksite ranks, and the cur- 
rent of feeling ran so high that in Indiana Yearly 
Meeting there was in 1 842-1 843 a considerable 
secession from the main body, and a new organi- 
zation was formed under the name of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting of Antislavery Friends. Their 
number was about 2000, while that of the main 
body was 25,000. No lawsuits resulted, and the 
Orthodox body, which had been rather high- 
handed before the separation, seems quickly to 
have perceived its mistake, and practically to have 
abandoned the position that caused the separation. 
No other Yearly Meeting on the Continent recog- 
nized the new body. London Yearly Meeting, 
in which the sentiment in favor of antislavery was 
very strong, sent over a deputation to Indiana in 
hopes of reconciling the two bodies. Their action 
was not altogether appreciated by the antislavery 
Friends, but the effect desired was eventually 
brought about, and after ten years the new body 
formally dissolved, leaving its members free to act 
as they thought best. Some were lost to the So- 
ciety, but many, perhaps most, of them quietly re- 
turned to the original organization, where they 
were received with open arms, and some of them 
became very prominent.^ 

1 " History of the Separation in Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
1842-43 on Anti-Slavery Question, etc. Walter Edgerton, Cin- 
cinnati, 1856"; Hodgson, vol. ii., pp. 9-49. For an account of 
the English deputation's labors from an inside point of view, see 
" Memoirs of William Forster," vol. ii., pp. 193-210. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 175 

About this time John Greenleaf Whittier came 
into prominence as a true poet who had espoused 
the cause of the slave. There is no doubt that 
his thorough identification with the antislavery 
cause was a wonderful help to it, and that his in- 
fluence helped to raise it above the immediate 
issues of the present and did much to make its 
advocates see that they were in line with the 
eternal movement of right. He was through all a 
Quaker and never advocated force. Besides his 
songs for freedom, perhaps no one has done more 
to make current the Quaker conception of 
Christianity.^ He was born at Haverhill, Massa- 
chusetts, 1807, and died at Hampton Falls, New 
Hampshire, September 7, 1892. 

A large majority of the Friends, at least in the 
North and West, voted for Lincoln in i860 as the 
representative of the party that advocated freedom, 
though at that time the idea of freedom in the 
States where slavery already existed was not con- 
templated. As the war drew on, not a few of the 
antislavery men and not a few Friends thoroughly 
agreed with the position taken by Whittier and 
Garrison, that it would better to stand by, " the 
sad spectators of a suicide,** than to engage in 
fratricidal war. As a body, Friends of all parties 
endeavored to maintain their ground in favor of 
peace. Whittier came out strongly, in a poem 
addressed to the alumni of Friends* Boarding- 
school, Providence, telling them plainly that they 
1 See note, p. i68. 



176 The Friends. 

cannot take the battle-brand, but that they are 
now to suffer for the sake of their principles as 
well as with their country, and must not expect 
that because they believe it is wrong to fight they 
are to be spared their share of sorrow. His manly 
words doubtless stirred many to renewed faith- 
fulness. But not a few felt the dilemma put by 
President Lincoln in a letter written by him to 
the widow of Joseph John Gurney, then residing 
in New Jersey. After speaking of his appreciation 
of a visit she had paid him, and of her letter to him,^ 
he says : ** Your people, the Friends, have had 
and are having a very great trial. On principle 
and faith opposed to both war and oppression, 
they can only practically oppose oppression by 
war. In this hard dilemma some have chosen one 
horn and some the other. For those appealing 
to me on conscientious grounds I have done and 
shall do the best I could and can, in my own con- 
science, under my oath to the law.'*^ 

Eliza P. Gurney in her reply to the President 
clearly and forcibly maintains the alternative that 
wrong is not to be set right by wrong. There were 
some in the Society who thought otherwise, 
and not a few of both branches were found in the 
army. It was a '* Hicksite Quaker ** who wrote the 

1 The visit referred to was " a religious visit," in which Eliza 
P. Gurney gave him what she felt to be a message from the Lord. 
The letter was written at his request, and after his assassination 
was found in his breast pocket. 

2 ** Memoirs and Correspondence of Eliza P. Gurney," p. 317. 
The letter is given in facsimile. The original is now in possession 
of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 177 

song ** We are coming, Father Abram.*' ^ Much 
has been said about the number of Friends in the 
army, but more than the occasion warrants. The 
peculiar custom which grew up of admitting the 
children of Friends as full members by right of 
birth, with all its undeniable advantages had this 
drawback, that many who had never made any 
Christian profession were counted as Friends, and 
when these enlisted it was considered that they 
had forsaken their position, when in reality many 
of them had nothing but a traditional position on 
the subject. In many cases those who enlisted 
were disowned by their meetings, in many others 
their acknowledgment of regret was accepted, 
and in others no action was taken. On the other 
hand, there were numerous instances of persons 
who were faithful to their testimony for peace 
amid much that was painful. This was specially 
the case in the South, where the Friends refused 
in the face of positive persecution and much 
physical suffering to bear arms. None of them 
absolutely lost their lives, but on several occasions 
they were ordered to be shot, but the soldiers, 
impressed with their Christian courage and 
patience, refused to obey the command. Some 
were deprived of food and drink, and subjected to 
many and humiliating punishments, but they re- 
mained firm.^ The Confederate Government 

1 James S. Gibbons, see " Life of Abby H. Gibbons," New 
York, 1897, vol. I, p. 295. 

2 See Fernando G. Cartland, " Southern Heroes," Cambridge, 
Mass., 1895; "Account of the Sufferings of Frieads of North 

12 



178 The Friends. 

created an exemption tax, which not a few paid, 
while others did not feel that such a course would 
be right, and chose rather to suffer. It was a 
noticeable fact that this firm stand on the part of 
the Friends resulted in North Carolina in an actual 
increase in membership, others being so deeply im- 
pressed with their faithfulness that they examined 
into their principles and joined them, although 
the exemption privilege was not granted to new 
members. The close of the war found Friends 
more earnest in the promotion of peace, and 
they formed themselves into a Peace Association 
of Friends in America, which put lecturers into the 
field, and issued tracts, and soon started a monthly 
periodical, called " The Messenger of Peace." 
The Association was heartily sustained by the 
various Yearly Meetings, though after a number 
of years the interest in evangelization turned 
the attention of Friends in other directions. 
More recently, however, it has shown new life, 
and has lately been incorported under the laws of 
Indiana, and is pressing the cause with more 



The Indians, Colored Populatioriy etc. 

From the time of George Fox and William Penn 
there has been great interest felt by Friends in the 
Indians, and on their part this much-injured people 

Carolina Yearly Meeting, 1861-1865," 2d Edition, Philadelphia, 
186S ; also London, 1868. See also Friends' Quarterly Examiner, 
vol. 3, pp. 29 ff., London, 1869. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 179 

are said to have retained to this day their affection 
for and confidence in the Friends. So far as the 
records go to which there has been access, the 
Society has always maintained a kindly and just 
attitude toward them. The early history has al- 
ready been referred to. It remains to speak of 
the later history. The various Yearly Meetings 
had schools and various mission interests among 
the Indians, which appear to have been measur- 
ably successful, especially as regards the general 
well-being of the tribes under their control, and, 
whenever opportunity offered. Friends were ready 
to appear on behalf of the red man before the 
government. That they undertook to any great 
extent the work of evangelization of the tribes 
does not appear. How the Friends became more 
closely identified with the education and training 
of the Indians is an interesting history. The 
following extract from President Grant's first An- 
nual Message to Congress puts the whole matter 
concisely, and describes the reasons for the new 
plan which he inaugurated. He writes: "From 
the foundation of the government to the present, 
the management of the original inhabitants of this 
continent, the Indians, has been a subject of em- 
barrassment and expense, and has been attended 
with continuous robberies, murders, and wars. 
From my own experience upon the frontiers and 
in Indian countries, I do not hold either legisla- 
tion, or the conduct of the whites who come in 
contact with the Indian, blameless for these hos- 



i8o The Friends. 

tiHties. The past, however, cannot be undone, 
and the question must be met as we now find it. 
I have attempted a new policy toward these wards 
of the nation (they cannot be regarded in any 
other light than as wards), with fair results so far 
as tried, and which I hope will be attended ulti- 
mately with great success. The Society of Friends 
is well known as having succeeded in living in 
peace with the Indians in the early settlement of 
Pennsylvania, while their white neighbors of other 
sects in other sections were constantly embroiled. 
They are also known for their opposition to all 
strife, violence, and war, and are generally noted 
for their strict integrity and fair dealings. These 
considerations induced me to give the manage- 
ment of a few reservations of Indians to them, and 
to lay the burden of the selection of agents upon 
the Society itself. The result has proven most 
satisfactory." ^ 

In his message for 1870 President Grant further 
develops his plan and the underlying idea in his 
mind. He says : " The experiment of making it 
a missionary work was tried with a few agencies 
given to the denomination of Friends, and has 
been found to work most advantageously. . . . 
Indian agencies being civil offices, I determined 
to give all the agencies to such religious denomi- 
nations as had heretofore established missionaries 
among the Indians, and perhaps to some other 

1 " Messages of the Presidents," vol. 7, p. 38 ; " Messages and 
Documents, 1869-70," p. 14. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. i8i 

denominations who would undertake the work on 
the same terms, i. e., as a missionary work. The 
societies selected are allowed to name their own 
agents, subject to the approval of the Executive, 
and are expected to watch over them and aid them 
as missionaries, to Christianize and civilize the 
Indian, and to train him in the arts of peace. . . • 
I entertain the confident hope that the policy now 
pursued will, in a few years, bring all the Indians 
upon reservations, where they will live in houses, 
have schoolhouses and churches, and will be pur- 
suing self-sustaining avocations, and where they 
may be visited by the law-abiding white man with 
the same impunity that he now visits the civilized 
white settlements.'' ^ 

This inauguration of a new and honest and 
Christian policy on the part of the government 
toward the Indians is one of the brightest parts of 
President Grant's administration. The exact plan 
as he marked it out has not been pursued by his 
successors, but the impetus it gave to the cause of 
the Indian and the far-reaching results that have 
since been attained may be said to date their rise 
from the action of the President as described in 
these messages. It is not too much to claim that 
the enlightened policy of William Penn, adopted 
from conscientious adherence to the principles of 
peace and justice — a policy followed faithfully by 
those who came after him — was the direct influence 

^ " Messages of the Presidents," vol. 7, p. 109 ; " Annual Mes- 
sage, etc.," vol. i., p. 17. 



1 82 The Friends. 

that moved President Grant in the adoption of 
his policy. His practical eye had seen the failure 
of injustice, greed, and war, and had seen the suc- 
cess of justice and peace, and he chose the latter. 

The Society of Friends in its various branches — • 
for both Orthodox and "Hicksites '' were engaged 
in the work, though independently of each other- 
continued to do their share of work for the Indians 
in connection with the government for about fif- 
teen years, their last agent having withdrawn in 
1885. The accounts of all the agents nominated 
by Friends were honorably settled. *' In every 
case where suits have been brought against them 
in the United States courts, our Friends have been 
honorably acquitted, and the cost thrown upon 
the government.'* ^ 

The cessation of the work in connection with 
the government, only served to turn the attention 
of Friends more particularly to the subject of 
evangelization among the Indians, which they 
have carried out ever since with encouraging suc- 
cess, so that there were in 1904, four hundred 
and seventeen members of the Orthodox Society 
among the Indians, with four monthly meetings. 

Perhaps the most wonderful instance of the 
power of kind Christian treatment over the un- 

^ Report of Committee on Indian Affairs. See Baltimore 
Yearly Meeting (Orthodox) Minutes, 1886, p. 39. At one time 
Friends (Orthodox) had a Superintendent of Indian Affairs, 
eight Indian Agents, and eighty-five other members acting as em- 
ployees under the government. Their Christian influence was 
active, and it is safe to state that hundreds of Indians came 
through their efforts to a character-changing faith in Christ. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 183 

tamed savage is shown in the history of the 
Modocs. After they were conquered they were 
taken directly from the lava beds, where they had 
made such a desperate stand, and put under the 
peaceful care of the Friends. The change that 
soon came over their wild natures was marvelous. 
Steamboat Frank, who had been a terror to his 
enemies, was not only converted, but became in 
a comparatively short time a minister of the 
gospel among Friends, and an evangelist of real 
power and effectiveness. He so firmly adopted 
the principles of peace that he would not bear a 
deadly weapon even as an officer of the peace, 
and once when his brother was unjustly struck 
down beside him by a white man, he simply re- 
marked that there had been a time when he would 
in an instant have slain the aggressor, but that 
now he was of a different spirit. He died a few 
years since, while in Portland, Maine, whither he 
had gone to attend the Yearly Meeting of Friends 
for New England. The history of the success 
that the Friends have had with the Indians, as 
well as the success attained by other denomina- 
tions, is a standing proof that the Indians, after 
all these generations of wrong treatment at the 
hands of the stronger race, are still open to kind- 
ness and justice. In all movements for the pro- 
tection and advancement of the Indian those who 
are working have the solid support of members 
of the Society of Friends, both '* Hicksite ** and 
Orthodox. 



184 The Friends. 

Friends have also continued their interest in 
the welfare of the negro, but in this respect have 
hardly come up to what might have been expected 
from them after their earlier labors on their behalf. 
It would have been supposed that of all the others 
they would have been foremost to establish mis- 
sions and labor among them, but this has not 
been the case. However, they have done a good 
deal. Southland College, Arkansas, has for years 
been doing a patient, steady, and successful work, 
and has turned out many who have been able as 
teachers and in other ways have aided to raise 
their fellow-people. Friends in the North ^ have 
missions in Virginia, North Carolina and Tennes- 
see, and various institutions not under the care of 
Friends are, assisted by them. Not very many of 
this race have joined the Society, though there are 
some who have done so, and a few have become 
ministers among them.^ 

Philanthropy^ Education^ etc. 

In regard to general labor for the advancement 
of the poor. Friends have been more in the habit 
of uniting with others than in carrying on inde- 
pendent work of their own. As a rule they have 
been conspicuous for their solid sense and steadi- 
ness of purpose, and have been rather the stalwart 

1 This is specially true of New York and Philadelphia Yearly 
Meetings. 

2 It is believed that this statement applies only to the Or- 
thodox. 



Reorganization.— Further Progress. 185 

supporters of movements than the ones who ap- 
peared before the public as leaders. They have 
been stronger in council than in the brilliant 
excercise of gifts, and in plain practical common 
sense than in the graceful accomplishments. 
For this reason the service done by Friends to 
the various movements has often been overlooked. 
They have not seldom given the needed sugges- 
tion at the right time. Thus it is said to have 
been a Friend who was the means of starting 
Father Matthew on his great temperance work in 
Ireland. The modern idea of fresh-air funds and 
free sanitariums for sick children during the sum- 
mer months is not new among Friends. ** The 
Annual Association of Women Friends for the Re- 
lief of Sick Children in the Summer Season *' was 
in full running order in Philadelphia in the summer 
of 1849, with a corps of nine physicians, ready to 
furnish free excursions by rail or steamboat, and 
in extreme cases to procure free board in the 
country for mothers with their sick infants.^ 
Later the work of Sarah Smith in the Indiana 
penitentiary, where she was for many years matron, 
must not be overlooked. She was one of the 
band of noble women who demonstrated that to 
treat criminals kindly and as human beings should 
be treated was not only humane, but eminently 
the wise thing to do for their reformation. 

The interest of the " Hicksites ** in the cause of 
temperance has been noted, and the Orthodox 

1 " Friends' Review," Philadelphia, vol. ii., p. 576, 



i86 The Friends. 

have not been behind them. Every Yearly Meet- 
ing has special committees on the subject, and, 
with perhaps no exception, the Disciplines of all 
make the manufacture and sale, of intoxicating 
liquors for use as a beverage a disownable offense. 
The Western Yearly Meetings are particularly 
earnest in the cause of the absolute prohibition of 
the traffic. 

The interest of Friends in education developed 
early, and while they did not produce great 
scholars, they were able to keep the average 
educational standard of their members at a higher 
level than that of the community around them. 
This, with their strict moral discipline, made them 
generally persons of considerable influence in every 
neighborhood where they were found. New York 
Yearly Meeting opened the first boarding-school 
for Friends* children at Nine Partners, Dutchess 
Co., New York in 1796. It was for children of 
both sexes. Moral training was made primary, 
and intellectual training secondary. After the 
separation it remained in the hands of the Ortho- 
dox Friends. About thirty years ago it was 
moved to Union Springs, New York where it is 
still succesfuUy carried on. 

The next movement, three years later (1799) 
was the establishment of a boarding-school at 
Westtown,^ Chester County, Pennsylvania by 

^ It is not generally known that the establishment of this 
school was largely due to the celebrated John Dickinson, the 
author of *' The Fanner's Letters," member of the Continental 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 187 

Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, on an estate of six 
hundred acres. It was also for both sexes. The 
school has exercised for more than a century a 
very wide and deep influence upon Friends of Phil- 
adelphia and Baltimore Yearly Meetings. The 
teaching is thorough and the discipline strict. At 
the separation it remained in the hands of the Or- 
thodox. In 1887 handsome new buildings, with 
all modern improvements, were occupied. 

In 1819 New England Yearly Meeting, in- 
fluenced largely by the philanthropist Moses 
Brown, who had for years labored to establish 
such a school, and had given valuable land in 
Providence, Rhode Island for the purpose, opened 
'* Friends* Boarding-school." This school has 
been exceedingly successful, and has been to New 
England what Westtown has been to Pennsylvania. 
In 1904 the name was changed to " The Moses 
Brown School.'* It is coeducational, and has in re- 
cent years become very liberal in its policy, so that 
many of its students are not Friends. Moses 
Brown, above mentioned, was also one of the 
greatest benefactors of Brown University, and 
through his influence the charter provides that a 
certain proportion of the trustees, who are chosen 
from various religious denominations, shall be 
Friends.^ 

Congress, etc. He and his wife contributed to its endowment 
(" Life and Times of John Dickinson," C. J. Stille, Philadelphia, 
1891, pp. 328, 329.) 

^ See " Sketch of Moses Brown," by Augustine Jones, principal 
of Friends' Boarding-school, Providence, 1S93. 



1 88 The Friends. 

Soon after the separation of 1827-28 the sub- 
ject of more advanced education claimed the at- 
tention of Orthodox Friends, with the result of 
establishing Haverford School, in 1833, at Haver- 
ford, Pennsylvania. After several years of suc- 
cessful operation it had pecuniary difficulties and 
was closed for about three years, but was re- 
opened in 1848. Though having a collegiate 
course, it did not apply for a charter as a college 
until 1856, being the first institution of the Society 
to assume that position. It is under the control 
of a corporation all the members of which must 
be Friends. It is, however, practically unsectarian 
in its teaching. It ranks high among the smaller 
colleges of the country. Among its professors 
have been Thomas Chase, of the American Com- 
pany of Revisers of the New Testament, and an 
editor of a number of the classics, and also J, 
Rendel Harris, who during his professorship dis- 
covered the long-lost " Apology of Aristides '* in 
the convent on Mount Sinai.^ 

The Friends of North Carolina opened New 
Garden Boarding-school in 1837. The great pre- 
judice against Friends on account of their anti- 
slavery principles made the work difficult. The 
school was conducted during the whole Civil War 
on a gold basis, and came out without embarrass- 
ment, and without having missed a class — a record 

1 In 1897, the college, as residuary legatee, came into the 
possession of the estate of Jacob P. Jones, amounting to 
about one million dollars, making the total endowment about 

j5i, 500,000. 



Reorganization. — Further Progress. 189 

which from a financial as well as an educational 
point of view was probably unique in the South 
during that period. In 1888 the school was raised 
to the rank of a college, and is now known as 
Guilford College. It is coeducational. 

The Friends in the West owing to the circum- 
stances of their position were naturally somewhat 
later in the establishment of Boarding-schools. In 
1847 one was established, under the care of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting, near Richmond, Indiana, which 
in 1859 ^^^ chartered as Earlham College. It is 
in a flourishing condition, under the joint control 
of Indiana and Western Yearly Meetings. Wil- 
mington College, Wilmington, Ohio, was opened 
i87i,and Penn College, Oskaloosa, Iowa in 1873. 
Both these are doing good work. In addition to 
these is Pacific College, Newberg, Oregon (1891), 
and Pickering College, Pickering, Ontario, Canada, 
Whittier College, California, and Friends Univer- 
sity, Wichita, Kansas, (1898). 

A very important college for women was founded 
at Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, 1885, in accordance 
with the will of Dr. Joseph W. Taylor, a Friend of 
Burlington, New Jersey. By its charter all the trus- 
tees are required to be members of the Society of 
Friends (Orthodox), but it cannot be classed as 
a denominational college. It has extensive and 
beautiful buildings, and is the most advanced 
college for women in the country. Its endowment 
is about $1,300,000. 

There are many schools and academies under 



190 The Friends. 

the control of Friends which cannot be named. 
As with the *' Hicksites// the Orthodox have taken 
great interest in educational matters, and in 
1877 an important and influential conference on 
education was held at Baltimore, which was 
followed by others ; and in addition to these, 
local conferences have frequently been held. 



CHAPTER VIL 

i,at:er years (ninete^bnth century) 
orthodox. 

THE great awakening of the separation was 
not lost, and the body came more and more 
into something of the spirit of the earlier age. 
The progress was, however, slow at first, and the 
casual observer would have noticed but little 
change. The Friends in different parts of the 
country presented very different aspects as to num- 
bers. In the East generally there was for over 
thirty years a steady decline, the chief cause being 
emigration. In New England the attractions of 
the West were peculiarly enticing to the practical- 
minded Friend. The failure of the whale fisheries 
of Nantucket and New Bedford led to a very 
general exodus.^ Emigration acted as a less im- 
portant factor in New York and Pennsylvania, 
but farther south another cause operated with 
great force. The many disabilities that Friends 
suffered in slaveholding States from their faithful 
adherence to their position that it was wrong to 
hold fellow-beings in slavery were a great drag 

1 On the Island of Nantucket there were sixty years ago about 
twelve hundred Friends ; there are now (1905) no Friends of any 
branch resident on the Island. 

191 



192 The Friends. 

upon them. It was exceedingly difficult — in fact, 
often impossible — to procure free labor, especially 
in the country districts. In these same localities 
manual labor was by a false public sentiment con- 
sidered degrading, so that those who from consci- 
entious grounds had to do such work themselves 
were obliged to take a lower position in society 
than the one to which they really belonged. 
Their well known principles placed increasing 
difficulties in their way in business, and also 
rendered them objects of suspicion to their slave- 
holding neighbors, who resented their opposition 
to the " peculiar institution," and often suspected 
them of aiding negroes to escape^ — a suspicion far 
better founded as regards Friends north of Mason 
and Dixon's line than south of it. To the Friends 
living in such an uncongenial atmosphere the free 
West appeared as a land of promise, and a steady 
exodus soon set in. The Friends from this cause 
died out in South Carolina, and were so greatly 
reduced in number in Virginia that in 1845 Virg- 
inia Yearly Meeting was suspended and joined to 
Baltimore Yearly Meeting. This latter body, 
small to begin with (after the separation), had 
also suffered from the same cause, so that the two 
joined were still the smallest Yearly Meeting in 
the world. The same state of things existed in 
North Carolina, and at one time it seemed as if 
there were risk of that Yearly Meeting being lost. 
Sometimes whole congregations would emigrate 
in a body, so that one instance has been known 



Later Years (Orthodox). 193 

where the same church organization remained in 
force, the same officers continuing to act in the 
new settlement as they had done in the old 
home.^ 

Another cause of the diminution in numbers 
was the strict enforcement of the Discipline and 
prompt disownment of members for what in 
this day seem comparatively slight offenses. To 
marry a non-member, or to make use of any other 
religious marriage ceremony than that of Friends, 
was a disownable offense on the ground that it 
recognized what was called, in the rather severe 
language of the Society in that day, a ** hireling" 
ministry.^ Many other things that would now be 
esteemed trivial, but which had had, at the begin- 
ning at least, a foundation in some principle that 
was deemed important, were made the cause for 
expulsion from the Soccety. That the denomi- 
nation should have lived at all through such re- 
strictions, especially as it was not thought right 
to use any efforts to obtain new members, is a 
striking evidence of the power that was in the 
body. Increase of spiritual life would at first 
tend to increase the activity in the support of the 
Discipline, till as the life grew the power that was 
present gradually caused unnecessary restrictions 
to be laid aside and others to be modified. 

Still another cause of decline in numbers was 



^ S. B. Weeks, " Southern Quakers and Slavery," Baltimore 
1896. 
2 Civil ceremonies were also offences against the Discipline. 

13 



194 The Friends. 

that there were for many greater attractions in a 
life of more conformity with the ways of ordinary 
persons, so that not a few left from their own free 
will. Again, the position of Friends on a variety 
of subjects of doctrine and practice was so unlike 
that of the other denominations about them that 
it required the courage of one's convictions to 
withstand the weight of public opinion. When 
all these reasons are taken into consideration, the 
wonder is that so many remained, and not that 
there was a decline. 

The picture presented in the West during this 
period was in several respects very different. 
While the East was losing by emigration, the 
West was gaining. The meetings in Ohio, Indi- 
ana, and Iowa soon became large and flourish- 
ing. For a long time fully as great strictness pre- 
vailed as in the East, and there was the same 
readiness to *' disown^'* but the circumstances 
were different. The country was new and thinly 
settled at first, and there were fewer temptations 
to worldliness. Again, the Friends settled largely 
in communities, so that in many cases they would 
form the bulk of the population, and in this way 
public opinion would be with them. Their growth 
was large, and new Yearly Meetings were set up. 
Ohio had been set off in i8i2 from Baltimore; 
Indiana from Ohio in 1821. In 1858 Western 
(comprising western and northern portions of 
Indiana, and eastern Illinois) was set off; Iowa 
in 1863, and Kansas in 1872. All these were 



Later Years (Orthodox). 195 

established from Indiana Yearly Meeting, which 
also set off Wilmington Yearly Meeting of south- 
western Ohio» in 1892. Iowa Yearly Meeting in 
1893 set off the Yearly Meeting of Oregon, and 
in 1895 California. About two thirds of all the 
Friends in the world are in the United States 
west of the Alleghanies. 

It must not be concluded that the decrease in 
membership in the East continued. After 1865 
a new life appeared there also, especially in New 
York and New England where the decrease 
stopped and an increase is noted, especially in the 
former. North Carolina also about trebled its 
membership, and Baltimore nearly doubled. This 
has been notwithstanding the continual loss 
through emigration, and the fact of a low birth-rate. 

In 1867 Canada Yearly Meeting was set off from 
New York. It was considered an interesting fact 
that during the time of the holding of its first 
session the " Dominion of Canada '' was inaugu- 
rated.* 

Great changes have taken place since the tide 
has turned, and Friends became an aggressive, 
growing body, instead of a diminishing one. The 
old peculiar cut of dress and the ** plain ** lan- 
guage of ** thee *' and '* thou ** have been discarded, 

1 Settlement of Friends in Canada were made from Pennsyl- 
vania, New Jersey, and New York during the latter part of the 
eighteenth century. For a time under the care both of Philadel- 
phia and of New York Yearly Meetings, they were finally joined 
to the latter, with which they were incorporated until 1867. 
Some Friends near the New York line were retained when those 
of the Canadian meetings were set off. • 



196 The Friends. 

as having no religious value for the present age.* 
The numerical names for months and days are 
still almost universally used by Friends in their 
official language and in their records, but the prac- 
tice of using them in ordinary conversation is 
rapidly dying out. 

There has also been a considerable relaxation 
in the Discipline. Many old rules have been 
either annulled or allowed to become a dead 
letter. In this change there may be a question 
whether there is not a risk of going to the other 
extreme, but nevertheless there is a great deal of 
care in respect to daily living. But the attitude 
of the meeting and its officers has long ceased to 
be one of judging with a view to cutting off the 
offender, and is now one of encouragement toward 
the weak and the restoration of those who are 
astray. As soon as this feeling became general 
the rapid decline in numbers ceased. 

Friends during the thirty years succeeding the 
separation of 1828 reawakened to the fact that 
one of the main duties of the Christian Church is 
to carry the gospel to those who do not know 
it. Almost every Yearly Meeting is pervaded 
with the sense that this is the great object toward 
which every avenue of work is to contribute. 

1 Not a few continue to use the " thee " and the " thou " in 
their families and to their intimate Friends, partly for old asso- 
ciation and partly in the way the French and Germans do, as a 
sign of the familiarity of friendship. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting 
continues to lay considerable stress on the old form of dress and 
address, and until a very recent date declined to record as a 
minister any one who did not wear ' plain dress." 



Later Years (Orthodox). 197 

Everything is now chiefly judged from the simple 
point of view as to whether it will tend to the 
spread to the knowledge of Jesus Christ and the 
building up of believers. From being one of the 
most traditional of all bodies Friends have come to 
believe that an essential characteristic of Quaker- 
ism is freedom, and so traditionalism is now with 
many one of their greatest fears. The simplicity 
of their organization, the freedom in their meet- 
ings for worship to any one to take vocal part 
under what is felt to be the guidance of the Spirit, 
each one being subject to the judgment of the 
rest, allows flexibility and variety of service and 
the development of individual gifts. In not a few 
instances their freedom from an established order 
of clergy has been found to be the means of in- 
spiring confidence. The practice of silent united 
worship as the basis upon which meetings are held, 
where it is appreciated, tends to cause the wor- 
shiper to seek the Lord directly, and thus strength- 
ens religious character. 

The change of front was truly marvelous, and 
on the whole was accomplished with very little 
friction. A number of prominent ministers and 
others in the latter years of the nineteenth cen- 
tury sought to change the position of the Friends 
on the subject of baptism and the Supper. This 
was especially the case in Ohio, which Yearly 
Meeting in 1886 refused to make the subject in 
any way a test matter. All the other Orthodox 
Yearly Meetings, took prompt action, declaring it 



198 The Friends. 

incompatible for any one who observed these or- 
dinances or advocated the use of them to remain 
in the position of minister or elder. This rule was 
not strictly enforced, but the general sentiment of 
the Society supported it, and the matter soon 
ceased to be a burning question. 

A general conference of Friends (Orthodox), for 
the purpose of taking into consideration matters of 
general interest to the body at large, was suggested 
in Indiana Yearly Meeting, 1886, and a proposition 
that such a conference should be held at Rich- 
mond, Indiana, in 1887 was sent by that Yearly 
Meeting to all the Orthodox Yearly Meetings in 
the United States and Canada, and also to Lon- 
don and Dublin Yearly Meetings. The proposi- 
tion was agreed to by all the yearly meetings, ex- 
cept Philadelphia,^ and delegates were appointed. 
The conference met as proposed. Tenth month, 
1887, it was the first of its kind, no other confer- 
ence having had delegates from both Europe and 
America.^ It lasted for three days and accom- 
plished a vast amount of work. The most im- 
portant of its actions were the issuing of a 
** Declaration of Faith '* and the suggestions for 
a stated conference to be held regular intervals. 
The " Declaration ** consisted largely of extracts 
from standard writings, and is too diffuse and 
general in its statements to be regarded as a rigid 

1 Philadelphia did not consider the question. 

2 Philadelphia was unofficially represented, several Friends 
belonging to that yearly meeting having been invited to par- 
ticipate in the discussions but not in reaching conclusions. 



Later Years (Orthodox). 199 

creed ; nevertheless, it much more nearly ap- 
proaches one than any of the Declarations that 
have preceded it. It conforms much more nearly 
to the standards of ordinary evangelical denomina- 
tions. As might have been expected from the 
fact that baptism and the Supper were the ques- 
tions then at issue, the space occupied in the consi- 
deration of these topics is disproportionately large. 
While it acknowledges the distinguishing views 
of Friends of the universality of the operation of 
the Spirit of Christ, it tends to pass them over. 
It states the Quaker doctrine of peace, and against 
oaths, etc., clearly and well ; states in guarded 
language the doctrines of future rewards and 
punishments ; and reaffirms the deity of Christ 
and salvation through him. The "Declaration" 
met with strong opposition in England, and Lon- 
don Yearly Meeting took no action on the docu- 
ment except to place it on its Minutes as part of 
the report of its committee. New England and 
Ohio took essentially the same position as London. 
Dublin, New York, and Baltimore gave a general 
approval of it without adopting it. The other 
(Orthodox) Yearly Meetings in the United States 
adopted it. This variety of action in no way 
altered the official relations of the Yearly Meet- 
ings, for the action of the conference was only 
advisory and not authoritative. 

After this the subject of baptism and the Sup- 
per became of secondary interest and was over- 
shadowed by that of the ministry. With the in- 



200 The Friends. 

crease of religious life and evangelizing zeal not 
only had old congregations taken on new growth 
and activity, but many new congregations had 
been formed. To accomplish this many methods 
formerly unknown among Friends were in various 
places brought into use, such as congregational 
singing, and the employment of methods more or 
less similar to those so common among the Metho- 
dists. Persons brought rapidly into the Society 
and with very little knowledge of the methods of 
Friends or instruction in them were found not to 
understand their unconventional ways. With the 
intense zeal for new converts that had now taken 
hold of the Society, it often seemed simpler to 
adapt the meetings to the crude ideas of the con- 
verts rather than to follow the slower process of 
educating them ; and in this way in many places 
in the West and some in the East very decided 
changes began to show themselves. Most notice- 
able of these was the introduction of " pastors," 
who at first were expected to give their whole 
time to looking after the congregation, and preach- 
ing, but not in any way to the exclusion of the 
rest, or even necessarily always to preach. In 
order to enable them to do this a very slight sup- 
port was afforded them. This change came very 
quietly, and the system became general in the 
Yearly Meetings west of the AUeghanies, though 
there are some individual exceptions. There is 
at present none of it in Philadelphia and Balti- 
more, and but little in North Carolina and New 



Later Years (Orthodox). 201 

England. It has given rise to much discussion, 
generally carried on in a very Christian i^pirit. It 
should be said, however, that there are very few 
meetings where there is not some opportunity for 
those who feel called upon to perform vocal ser- 
vice, or to exercise their gifts./ 

The Richmond Conference of 1887 had sugges- 
ted that a similar conference should be held every 
five years; Kansas Yearly Meeting in 1887 had 
suggested a general conference with legislative 
powers and a uniform discipline for all the yearly 
meetings, but this was not accepted by the other 
yearly meetings. Finally, in 1891 ** delegates 
from committees of various yearly meetings ap- 
pointed to consider and report upon the subject 
of organizing a Conference of Yearly Meetings of 
Friends in America ** met in Oskaloosa, Iowa. 
After careful consideration it was decided to pro- 
pose " that provided six yearly meetings, or a 
smaller number containing in the aggregate two- 
thirds of the membership of Friends in America, 
unite in the concern, such a conference be held 
every five years; and that the first one be held in 
1892." All arrangements were left to a committee 
which was to take action in case a sufficient num- 
ber of yearly meetings responded.^ 



1 Where the " Pastoral System " prevails, the meetings of the 
Christian Endeavor Society, to a very large extent, take the place 
of the meeting for worship as a training school for those called to 
the ministry. 

2 " Report of the Associate Committees of the Yearly Meetings 
on the subject of a Conference, etc., Oskaloosa, Iowa, 1891.'* 



202 The Friends. 

This proposition was forwarded by the com- 
mittee to all the American Yearly Meetings (Or- 
thodox), and after careful consideration was agreed 
to by all except Canada and Philadelphia * yet not 
fully as to details, most of the Yearly Meetings 
not considering themselves bound to continue to 
send delegates to future conferences unless it 
seemed best. Baltimore instructed its delegates 
not to take part in voting in case any question 
should be settled in that way.^ 

The conference was held in Tenth month, 1892, 
at Indianapolis, Indiana, and was unlike any that 
preceded it in the fact that the representation to 
it was in proportion to the membership of the 
respective Yearly Meetings,* and unlike the one 
of 1887 in having no representatives from Great 
Britain, Ireland, or Canada. There were 106 dele- 
gates present. In this conference the great ques- 
tion was that of "pastoral labor," and a minute on 
the subject was adopted. The delegates from Bal- 
timore, most of those from North Carolina, and a 
number from Kansas objected to the minute on 
the ground of its indorsement of the appointment 
of pastors, which they felt was a serious inter- 
ference with the true liberty of the member- 
ship at large, with spiritual worship, and the 

^ Philadelphia, it should be said, did not consider the matter. 

2 As a matter of fact, no question was decided by vote during 
the conference. 

^ " Each Yearly Meeting should be entitled to five delegates at 
large and one additional delegate for every one thousand members 
or fraction thereof exceeding five hundred." 



Later Years (Orthodox). 203 

development of strong Christian character. In 
the course of the discussion it was stated with- 
out contradiction that it placed the ministry 
on a financial basis and meant a professional 
class and theological seminaries, etc., and also 
the placing of meetings for worship under one 
man to the exclusion of others who might feel a 
call to preach or to exercise spiritual gifts or 
calls. These statements attracted much atten- 
tion and comment, and exercised a restraining in- 
fluence on not a few. 

The conference adopted the plan of organization 
proposed by the committee at Oskaloosa (1891), 
and appointed a committee consisting of one from 
each delegation present to make the necessary 
arrangements for a conference in 1897.^ 

In the field of evangelization Friends have been 
most successful, especially in the West. Their 
work by no means has been confined to their own 
denomination, but they have gladly labored for 
others and in union with other denominations. 
Although they have become a proselyting body, 
they are still remarkable for their freedom from 
jealousy of others and readiness to encourage 
converts to join whatever denomination of Chris- 
tians they may feel will be most helpful to them. 

Increasing attention is being paid to education 
and to the spreading of the doctrines of Friends 

1 This committee was " authorized to add to its own number 
representatives of other Yearly Meetings if any should desire to 
unite." 



204 The Friends. 

and to building up of consistent character. 
Probably at no time since the first founders of 
the Society passed away has there been such 
general healthful Christian experience in the So- 
ciety, so much zeal, and so much growth. In 
every Monthly Meeting there is a Pastoral com- 
mittee and in meetings where there is a Pastor 
this committee cooperates with him. 

Foreign Missions. 

With increased interest in home work the in- 
terest in the foreign field has also been aroused. 
Though in the earlier part of their history Friends 
were foremost in this work, during the next 
century their activity in this line of labor almost 
ceased. Early in the nineteenth century, such 
men as James Backhouse and George Washington 
Walker, of England, and later Daniel Wheeler, 
undertook long and important journeys in Africa, 
Australia, and the South Sea Islands. Toward 
the middle of the century Eli and Sybil Jones, of 
Maine, both of them ministers of remarkable 
power, visited Africa, and in 1865, Syria. They 
were the means of starting a mission on Mount 
Lebanon, and one at Ramallah, not very far from 
Jerusalem. The former is now under the care of 
English Friends, who were much earlier in the 
field of systematic mission work than American 
Friends, and the latter is under the care of New 
England Yearly Meeting aided by other Yearly 
Meetings. The work of foreign missions has ex- 



Foreign Missions. 205 

tended, and now nearly all the Yearly Meetings 
have special committees on the subject, and in 
addition to this there has been formed the 
Woman's Foreign Missionary Union of Friends, 
which is an active body having branches in most 
of the Yearly Meetings. The conference of 1892 
proposed the establishment of a central Board of 
Foreign Missions, whose duties should be to give 
information and promote unity of action on the 
part of the different Yearly Meetings, rather than 
to act as a controlling force. A sufficient number 
of Yearly Meetings agreed to this and the Ameri- 
can Friends Board of Foreign Missions was estab- 
lished in 1894. 

Lack of space forbids even a rdsicmi of the 
missions of this period, but in Japan, Syria, Mex- 
ico, and Alaska were flourishing mission stations, 
while to the missions of the English Friends in 
Syria, China, India, and Madagascar substantial 
aid was extended, and individuals went to the 
Congo State and elsewhere. A monthly paper, 
called the " Friends* Missionary Advocate,*' was 
established. In addition to this many Friends 
were much interested in the McCall missions in 
France. 

The Orthodox Friends are the only ones who 
are engaged in organized foreign mission work. 



CHAPTER VIII. 
lyATEST YBARS. 

(1894-1905.) 

ONE of the most important events in the his- 
tory of the Friends during the decade ending 
1905, was the ** American Friends Peace Con- 
ference ** held in Philadelphia, December 12-14, 
1901. This is the fir^t time since 1827 that all in 
America calling themselves Friends came to- 
gether under that name on a common platform, 
and united in a common effort toward an end in 
which all were interested. 

The idea arose in the Seventh Annual Coa- 
ference on International Arbitration at Lake 
Mohonk, New York, 1901. It was felt by the 
Friends who attended that conference ** that the 
opening year of the Twentieth Century ought 
not to be allowed to pass without some general 
manifestation, on the part of all in America who 
call themselves and are known as Friends, of their 
peace principles and faith.*' ^ The conference was 
held as stated above. The program consisted of 
carefully prepared papers on various phases of 
the peace question, with a limited time given to 

1 See "American Friends Peace Conference, etc., 1901. Phil- 
adelphia, 1902. Published by the Conference." 

207 



2o8 The Friends. 

general discussion. The meetings were largely 
attended and were interesting throughout, and 
there was no inharmonious note. 

*' PRIMITIVE '' FRIENDS. 

There has been little to note in the history of 
those called '* Primitive/* or, as they like to be 
called, ** Conservative *' Friends. They have con- 
tinued in their quiet unaggressive course. As no 
official statistics are taken, it is impossible to 
make accurate statements as to their number; 
estimates vary from two hundred to two hundred 
and fifty, but the former is probably nearer the 
actual membership. 

They have General and Quarterly Meetings, 
which are independent of each other, and are 
practically Yearly Meetings, as once a year each 
meeting considers such subjects as would normally 
come before a Yearly Meeting. Epistles are ex- 
changed '* as way opens for it,*' but usually 
every year. The Discipline followed is that of 
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, as revised and 
adopted in 1834. Unless some change should 
occur, this faithful little body must die out, for 
there are few accessions and the losses by death 
greatly exceed the gains by birth.^ 

1 Their meetings are : Scipio Quarterly Meeting of Friends, 
comprising Poplar Ridge, and Ulysses, New York; Quarterly 
Meeting of Friends for New England, comprising Providence 
and Centredale, Rhode Island, and Lynn, Massachusetts; and 
General Meeting of Friends for Pei\nsylvania, New Jersey, Del- 
aware, etc. (Meetings at Philadelphia, Bristol, and Fallsington, 
^Pennsylvania.) 



Latest Years. 209 

"WILBURITES/' 

As with the '* Primitive** Friends, there has 
been little to note in the history of this branch. 
As with the ** Primitive " Friends also, few acces- 
sions and a low birth rate have prevented the in- 
crease in membership, and the decline in num- 
bers has been steady. How great this has been 
it is impossible to say, as no statistics are taken ; 
but the loss since the government census of 1890 
can scarcely be less than ten per cent, and is 
probably more. This would make the member- 
ship about 3900.^ In some of the western yearly 
meetings, where the birth-rate is higher, it is 
possible that the meetings have held their own, 
but the decline in the East has been great. 

The most interesting event in their later his- 
tory is the establishment of a new Yearly Meet- 
ing in North Carolina. The membership consists 
almost wholly of Friends living in the eastern 
part of the State who separated from North Car- 
olina Yearly Meeting (Orthodox). These Friends 
were disturbed by the introduction into North 
Carolina Yearly Meeting of some of the so-called 
** Western methods.** The troubles came to a 
head when the Yearly Meeting adopted the 
** Constitution and Discipline.** This was made 
the occasion of the separation. Great efforts 
were made by the Yearly Meeting to avoid a 
division, but the dissatisfied ones, taking prac- 

1 With the new North Carolina Yearly Meeting about 4150. 
14 



210 The Friends. 

tically the same ground as those who had sep- 
arated in Western, Kansas, and Iowa Yearly Meet- 
ings, held on their course and set up a new Yearly 
Meeting in 1904. 

In their defence they say that they have " met 
in Yearly Meeting capacity, in the love of God, 
under a deep religious concern, that Friends in 
this and other sections, who are spiritually op- 
pressed by the many changes that have taken place 
in the Society of Friends at large, and who desire 
to uphold and maintain the doctrines and prac- 
tices of the Christian religion in accordance with 
Early Friends, may be free to do so/* They de- 
sire " individual faithfulness to that waiting, 
spiritual worship wherein direct communion with 
the Father and with the Son, through the Holy 
Spirit, is to be known, and a fresh anointing given 
by Him for every work and service in His 
church, whether it be in preaching, prayer, or 
praise." They go on to emphasize the priesthood 
of believers, and the freedom from all forms and 
ceremonies ; they believe ** that no other than a 
free gospel ministry can fully accord with the 
teaching of our Lord and Saviour '* ; and they 
** plead for that liberty of conscience in individual 
believers for which our Early Friends suffered 
severe persecution, and even martyrdom, and 
which has been of such great blessing to hu- 
manity/' 

This meeting has addressed epistles to the 
" Wilburite " bodies, and, so far as known, has been 



Latest Years. 211 

recognized by them. The number of separatists 
is between two hundred and three hundred, and 
they are confined chiefly to one quarterly meeting.^ 

THE " HICKSITES.*' 

The renewal of life among the "Hicksites*' 
noticed in the preceding chapter has continued. 
The Committees on Philanthropic Labor have 
been especially active in carrying out the pur- 
poses for which they were established, which, as 
the name implies, are philanthropic rather than 
religious.^ 

The most potent influence, however, has been 
the Biennial Conference. These conferences are 
a development from the First-Day School Con- 
ferences, which, begun in 1868, were held annu- 
ally at various centres with the exception of 
1877, until 1879, fj*oi^ which date they have been 
held in alternate years. ** Friends Union for Phi- 
lanthropic Labor ^' was organized in Waynesville, 
Ohio, in 1882, and after 1883 the First-Day School 
and Philanthropic Conferences have been held at 
the same times and places. In 1896 an Educa- 
tional department was organized, in 1894 sub- 



1 See " Minutes of North Carolina Yearly Meeting of Friends, 
1904," pages 37-40. *' Minutes of North Carolina Yearly Meeting 
of Friends held at Cedar Grove, Northampton County, North 
Carolina, 1904." [Separatists.] 

^ The fields of labor are : " Mission work among Women and 
Children, Peace, Gambling, and kindred vices, Abolition of the 
death penalty, Purity, Improper publications. Temperance, 
Tobacco, Indian affairs. Prison reform, Equal rights for women, 
Work among the colored people." 



212 The Friends. 

jects of a definite religious character were added, 
and since 1902 the four hitherto partially distinct 
Conferences were merged into one General Con- 
ference to be held biennially, in which the Young 
Friends Associations were also represented/' It 
will be seen that the conference '' was a matter of 
development. It began with the conscious need 
of better applied methods for carrying on the 
work connected with one of the activities, and 
naturally expanded to meet the increasing 
needs." ' 

These conferences have brought out clearly the 
community of interest which belongs to Friends, 
have offered the opportunity for exchange of 
views, have widened the personal acquaintance of 
Friends, and have strengthened in every way the 
efforts made along religious, philanthropic, and 
educational lines.^ 

Two direct results of the conferences should be 
noted : First, the appointment of a joint com- 
mittee on Educational Interests, which takes into 
consideration the educational needs and opportu- 
nities of the whole field ; secondly, the appoint- 
ment of a committee on the Advancement of 
Friends* Principles. This committee was first 
appointed in 1902 and has since been actively em- 

^ Introduction " Proceedings of Friends General Conference 
Chautauqua, New York. 1900. Philadelphia, 1900," page iii. 

2 There is no uniform method employed in appointing delegates 
to these conferences ; in some Yearly Meetings they are chosen 
by the yearly meeting, in others by the committee on Philan- 
thropic Labor. The conferences are only advisory and have no 
disciplinary or legislative authority. 



Latest Years, 213 

ployed in fulfilling the objects of its establish- 
ment. These are, visiting and encouraging the 
weaker meetings, and indeed all who wish aid ; 
providing for lectures on the principles and 
doctrines of Friends ; and circulating books and 
other literature relating to Friends. Another 
work of this committee has been the establish- 
ment of a First-Day School Assembly at Buck 
Hill Falls, Pennsylvania, where there is a summer 
settlement of Friends. This assembly is held 
during the summer, and " the subjects discussed 
are. Methods of Primary Work, the History and 
Teaching of Friends, Aims and Methods — the 
last dealing especially with the psychological 
side of religious teaching and the appropriate use 
of the Bible in such teaching.'* 

Still another and important outgrowth of the 
conferences is the **Joint Committee of the Seven 
Yearly Meetings for work among Isolated 
Members." Meetings of this committee are held 
annually at different places. Through a salaried 
secretary at the central office in Philadelphia, 
isolated members all over the country are corre- 
sponded with, their addresses kept on file, and 
where there are enough Friends in one place these 
are encouraged to form {associations and hold 
meetings for worship. ^ 

An interesting feature of the Young Friends 
Associations has been the courses of lectures given 

^ The expenses of this committee including the salary of the 
Secretary, so far, have been met by voluntary subscriptions. . 



214 The Friends. 

under their auspices. These have been on Theo- 
logical and Biblical subjects, such as Bible His- 
tory, Doctrines, their History and Development, 
etc. The lecturers have not been confined to 
Friends, but specialists from other denominations 
have been invited to lecture from time to time. 

Another pleasant feature has been the readi- 
ness to join in fellowship, as far as practicable, 
with all who bear the name of Friends.^ 

Not since 1828 has there been so much life and 
interest shown or such activity in searching after 
truth and knowledge as at present. This interest, 
however, has been manifested almost wholly 
within the body, as there have been few if any 
direct efforts in the direction of increasing the 
membership. 

In this as in the smaller branches, there has 
been a steady decline in numbers. So far as 
statistics are available a loss of about twelve 
hundred members is shown since 1890. This is 
a serious outlook, though not peculiar, for it is 
true of all branches of Friends that accessions 
from outside are essential, not only for an increase 
of numbers, but to prevent absolute decline. (See 
Appendix for statistics.) 

1 This is shown in many ways ; as by inviting members of the 
Orthodox body to take part in anniversary exercises, to give ad- 
dresses and lectures at conferences and on other occasions, and 
also by the unofficial message of brotherly greeting sent through 
an individual by their New York Yearly Meeting, 1905, to Lon- 
don Yearly Meeting (then in session), and responded to in like 
manner. See Friends " Intelligencer," vol. 62, 6 mo. 7, p. 338, 
6 mo. 10, p. 355, 6 mo. 24, p. 390. The (London) Friend, vol. 45, 
6mo. 9, p. 371. 



Latest Years. 215 

ORTHODOX. 

In accordance with the instructions of the Con- 
ference of 1892, the executive committee fixed 
Tenth month, 19, 1897, as the date for opening 
the Third Quinquennial Conference of Friends in 
America, and IndianapoHs, Indiana, as the place 
of meeting. 

The Conference met as appointed, with 129 
delegates present from all the American Yearly- 
Meetings (Orthodox), except Philadelphia.^ Un- 
like the previous conferences, there was a definite 
pre-arranged program, and the discussions were 
opened by thoughtful addresses or papers, which 
were followed by free but courteous discussion. 

While the old fundamental principles and doc- 
trines of Quakerism were reaffirmed, there was a 
strong feeling, but slightly tempered with con- 
servatism, that, if needful, old methods and 
even some doctrines, must give place to new, 
in order to meet present issues and to solve 
present problems. The work and qualification of 
the ministry was a subject specially considered, 
and on it the conference formulated its conclu- 
sions at length, and in general sympathy with 
what is called the " pastoral movement.*' A 
rather colorless declaration regarding the *^ Higher 
Criticism *' was also adopted, in addition to 
others on matters of general interest. 

Perhaps the most important subjects before 

1 Philadelphia, as before, did not consider the matter. 



2i6 The Friends. 

the conference were those of a closer union of 
the Yearly Meetings, and a uniform Discipline.* 
These were fully discussed, and the conclusion 
reached that both were desirable. A committee 
of two from each yearly meeting taking part in 
the conference was appointed to formulate a plan 
of union, and prepare a uniform discipline to be 
submitted to the yearly meetings for their ap- 
proval, both to become operative when adopted 
by such a number as might be agreed upon. 
This number was afterwards fixed by the com- 
mittee at seven. The character of this union and 
the Discipline have already been considered in the 
Introduction to this volume. (See pages 22-24). 
As the adoption of the plan of union and of 
a uniform Discipline was problematical, the con- 
ference of 1897 provided for the meeting of a 
Fourth Quinquennial Conference in 1902. Dele- 
gates to this were appointed by the same Yearly 
Meetings as were represented in the preceding 
conference. The conference met in Indianapolis 
Tenth month 21, 1902. One session only was 
held, at which the new Discipline, known as 
" The Constitution and Discipline for the Ameri- 
can Yearly Meetings of Friends," was received, 
and with it the report of the committee by which 
it was prepared, stating that eleven yearly meet- 
ings had accepted the plan of union, adopted the 

^ Direct communications suggesting and supporting some such 
action werp received by the Conference from Indiana, Wilming- 
ton, W^tern, and Kansas Yearly Meetings. 



Latest Years. 217 

new Discipline, and had appointed delegates^ to 
the new Five-Years Meeting, which would take 
the place of the conference. After the accept- 
ance of the report, and the transaction of some 
formal concluding business, the conference ad- 
journed without day. 

The first Five-Years Meeting met the next day, 
Tenth month 22, 1902, with 137 delegates from 
all the American (Orthodox) Yearly Meetings ex- 
cept Philadelphia, Canada, and Ohio, the last 
two, however, sent fraternal delegates, who were 
invited to take part in the discussions, but were 
not appointed on committees or given a vote.* 
The delegates were appointed under the rule laid 
down in the Constitution and Discipline, which 
was the same as that followed in the Conference 
of 1892 and 1897.' The proceedings were trans- 
acted under the rules of parliamentary usage. 

The sessions were marked by great interest. 
Considerable time was taken up in organizing 
the work of the Five-Years Meeting and discuss- 
ing its functions. The papers were timely and 
suggestive, and the discussions lively and gen- 
erally helpful. 

The Meeting, in accordance with the new Dis- 

1 The delegates to the Five- Years Meeting and to the Confer- 
ence were with slight exception the same individuals. 

2 Canada adopted the Discipline in 1900, but reconsidered the 
subject in 1901 and rejected it as not suited to their condition. 
Ohio rejected it on the ground that it was not definite enough on 
points of doctrine. Philadelphia did not consider it. 

8 See page 202, Note, also Constitution and Discipline, Part II, 
chap. xiii. 



21 8 The Friends. 

cipline, appointed an Evangelistic and Church 
Extension Board, one on Education, one on 
Legislation, and one on the Condition and Welfare 
of the Negroes ; it adopted as its official represen- 
tative on the respective subjects, the American 
Friends Board of Foreign Missions, the Associ- 
ated Executive Committee on Indian Affairs, and 
The Peace Association of Friends in America. 
After some discussion a committee was appointed 
to invite the different church organizations in 
America to unite in holding a general conference 
in 1906 on the subject of How to Prevent the evils 
arising from the Liquor Traffic, and to make 
arrangements for holding such a conference if a 
sufficient number of the church organizations 
should unite in the effort. 

There was no discussion relative to the "pas- 
toral " question, the fact of the general adoption 
of the system in some shape by most of the 
yearly meetings, being taken for granted. There 
was an evident desire on the part of the great 
majority of the delegates to find subjects upon 
which there would be agreement rather than dif- 
ference, and the spirit of the meeting was more 
conservative than that of the Conference of 1897. 

It is still too early to speak decidedly regarding 
the effect of the union just described. The fol- 
lowing judgment, published soon after the ad- 
journment of the Meeting, doubtless expresses 
the feelings of many :— " The Five- Years Meeting 
held at Indianapolis, last month, marks an era in 



Latest Years. 219 

the history of Orthodox Friends in America. 
The great body of the Society was then welded 
into an organization by the adoption of the 
'* Uniform DiscipHne/* that has brought the 
Yearly Meetings into one organic body in a sense 
that has never before been realized. It is a 
movement which, while fraught with possibilities 
of evil and of good, is to be regarded with hope. 
. . . As to the general influence of the Five- 
Years Meeting, just held, there can be no doubt 
that it tended to unite Friends from the different 
sections, and to bring them to a better under- 
standing of one another. That there are very 
important differences no one can deny, and in 
some places changes have been introduced which 
seem inconsistent with the fundamental position 
of Friends. At the same time it was perfectly 
clear that the Five Years Meeting was composed 
of persons who had the true Friendly spirit. 
Compared with the attitude of the similar gath- 
ering ten years ago at the same place, there was 
shown a distinctly greater love of Friends and 
their principles, and there is a revival of interest 
in the study of their history.* 

It is also too soon to estimate the value of the 
work of the Five-Years Meeting planned to be 
carried on through its " Boards.** One or two of 
these boards, perhaps, indicate what the Meeting 



^ " Richard H. Thomas, M.D., Life and Letters, London and 
Philadelphia, 1905," pp. 376, 377 (quoted from " The Inter- 
change," Eleventh month, 1902.) 



220 The Friends, 

felt should be objects of interest rather than 
interest itself. 

The American Friends Board of Foreign Mis- 
sions has done comparatively little in the field of 
*' general advisory oversight," ^ but has given most 
of its attention to mission work in Cuba, the 
results of which have been very encouraging. 

Largely through the efforts of the Board on 
Legishition the United States Congress has 
passed an amendment to the National Militia 
Law which exempts from militia duty Friends, 
and others who hold similar views in regard to 
war. This work alone justifies the appointment 
of the Board.' 

So far as known, the Boards on the welfare and 
condition of the Negro, and on Evangelistic and 
Church extension work, have done little except to 
endeavor to get an accurate survey of their fields 
of service. 

A very successful Educational Conference was 
held under the auspices of the Board on Educa- 
tion at Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana, 
July 31 to August 3, 1905. The conference was 

1 This was inevitable, the Yearly Meetings being unwilling to 
turn over their individual work to the Board. 

2 Amendment to House, Bill 15,345, Fifty-seventh Congress, 
2nd Sess. — ** Provided that nothing in this act shall be construed 
to require or compel any member of any well-recognized religious 
sect or organization at present organized and existing, whose 
creed forbids its members to participate in war in any form, and 
whose religious convictions are against war or participation 
therein, in accordance with the creed of said religious organiza- 
tion, to serve in the militia or any other armed or volunteer force 
under the jurisdiction of and authority of the United States." 
Congressional Record, vol. 36, page 780, January 14, 1903. 



Latest Years. 221 

attended by delegates from various yearly meet- 
ings, and representatives of almost every school 
and college of importance belonging to the Friends 
(Orthodox) in America. The exercises consisted 
of carefully prepared papers followed by discus- 
sion. 

General conferences on Education similar to 
this, beginning with that at Baltimore in 1877, 
have been held at Haverford College, Earlham 
College, Penn College, Oskaloosa, Iowa, and at 
Providence, Rhode Island. The intervals between 
the conferences have been about five years. The 
interchange of opinion and the comprehensive 
view obtained of the educational situation, have 
been of great benefit to the cause of education 
among Friends. 

During the past decade Foreign Mission work as 
shown by the annual reports to the Yearly Meet- 
ings and the reports of the American Friends 
Board of Foreign Missions, has been prosecuted 
with continued zeal and success. Beside this 
work, independent or semi-independent missions 
have been carried on in East Africa, and in Cuba, 
and perhaps elsewhere.^ [See Appendix.] 

Interest in Home Mission work has been un- 

1 The subjects discussed fell under the following heads :— 
** The Educational Situation ; The Articulation of our Educa- 
tional Agencies; The School and Society; The School and the 
Church ; and Our Educational Ideals." 

2 See Minutes of the various Yearly Meetings ; " Present Con- 
dition of the Foreign Mission Work of American Friends." 
Mahalah Joy, Proceedings of the Five- Years Meeting, 1902, also 
published separately ; Annual Reports of the American Friends 
Board of Foreign Missions, 1895-1905. 



222 The Friends. 

abated. In efforts to lessen the evils arising from 
the Liquor Traffic, and in the effort to suppress 
the traffic altogether, Friends as individuals, and 
as yearly meetings, have been active. Alto- 
gether, there has been probably no time when 
Friends have been more successful in practical 
work ; particularly that outside their own borders. 

In June, 1900, the first American Friends, 
(Orthodox) Summer School of Religious History, 
was held at Haverford College, Haverford, Penn- 
sylvania. The spacious and beautiful grounds, 
the halls of residence, the convenient lecture and 
class-rooms, the well furnished Library, all lent 
their aid to make the experiment a great success. 
The lectures were fresh and stimulating, and while 
a few were grieved at some of the state- 
ments made, most persons were helped and 
widened in their thoughts.^ A second Summer 
School equally successful, was held, again at Hav- 
erford, in 1904. This second school especially, 
was pervaded by a deep religious spirit. At each 
school about seven hundred individuals registered 
as attending one or more lectures. 

The present condition of the Orthodox Friends 
has been sufficiently indicated in the preceding 
pages. It might, however, be noted that the rate 
of annual increase in membership has not kept 
pace with that of the earlier years of the past 

1 The lecturers were by no means confined to Friends, for the 
list included such men as Professor George F. Moore of Harvard 
University, Professor William N. Clarke, Professor Robert W. 
Rogers, Washington Gladden of Columbus, Ohio, and others. 



Latest Years. 223 

decade.^ To what this comparative halt is due, 
is not easy to discover. It is enough to say that 
the condition is not peculiar to Friends, but is to 
be found in other branches of the Christian 
Church. 

In this brief history it will have been seen that 
the Friends acquired, through much suffering, 
first toleration, and then freedom both in civil 
and religious matters, not only for themselves, 
but for all men. Some have thought that their 
mission is ended, but there still seems to be need 
of them to emphasize the Christian Doctrine of 
Peace, the non-essentiality of ordinance and rit- 
ual, the spirituality of true worship, the reality of 
the direct communication of the will of God to 
the individual, and the priesthood of all believers. 

1 See Statistics, p. 225. 



STATISTICS. 



STATISTICS OF MEMBERSHIP, UNITED STATES CENSUS, 189O. 

Friends (Orthodox) 80655 

" (Hicksite) 21992 

" (Wilburite) 4329 

" (Primitive) 232 

Total 107,208 



STATISTICS. 1904. 

ORTHODOX. 



YEARLY MEETINGS. 



Philadelphia . . . 

New York 

New England. . . 

California 

Oregon 

Canada 

North Carolina. 
Wilmington (O.) 

Ohio 

Iowa 

Western 

Indiana^. 

Kansas 

Baltimore 

Totals 

Increase 

Decrease 



1896 



4450I 

3757 
4502 

1566 

1034 

5454 

5207 

5009 

III 24 

1 5091 

19510 

10848 

1125 



90036 



1898 



4200I 
3897 
4499 
1506 
1489 
1076 
5244 
5S65 
5-29 
II 274 
16100 

20393 

11301 

1226 



93299 
3263 



1900 



4468 

3756 

4503 
1510 

1553 
1030 

5456 
6089 

5773 
10865 
15868 
20144 
T0869 

1214 



93098 
201 



1902 



4400^ 

3545 
4462 
1710 
1607 
1075 

5194 

6273 

5809 

II 280 

15196 

19878 

11214 

1203 



92846 

252 



1904 



4441 
3339 
4415 
2046 

1635 
1122 

5619 
6291 

5577 
11135 
14347 
20049 
1 1094 

1155 



92265 
581 



1 Estimated. 

2 400 are deducted from totals, being estimated number of 
" Mission Members '* in Mexico. For 1904, 560 are deducted. 
See Minutes of Indiana Yearly Meeting 1896 to 1904. 

IS 22s 



226 



The Friends. 



MEMBERS IN FOREIGN MISSION FIELDS i UNDER 
THE CARE OF AMERICAN FRIENDS, 

1904. 



Alaska 

Alaska 

Alaska, Kotzebue . . . 

Mexico 

Mexico 

Cuba 

Jamaica 

Palestine, Ramallah. 

China and India 

Japan ^ 



Total. 



Oregon Yearly Meeting. 

Kansas " " 

California " 

Indiana " " 

Western " " . 

Amer. Friends Board For. Miss. 

Iowa Yearly Meeting. 

New England.. " " 

Ohio " " 

Philadelphia. .Friends 



60 
170 
560 
560 
240 
120 
651 

40 
169 
335 

2905 



FRIENDS IN EUROPE AND ELSEWHERE. 





1896 


1898 

16854 

2592 

237 

495 


1900 

17153 

2609 

249 

497 


1902 

17476 

2528 

247 

550 


1904 


London Yearly Meeting.. 

Dublin " " 


16476 

2610 

267 

510 


18221 
2511 

248 
800 


Continental Europe, etc ^ 

Australasia 


Africa ^ 


no 






Totals 


19863 


20178 


20508 


20801 


21890 





1 Estimated. 

2 This mission is not connected with the Yearly Meeting, but is 
carried on by an organization composed of Philadelphia Friends. 

^ Estimated. 



statistics. 



227 



MEMBERSHIP IN FOREIGN MISSION FIELDS.' 

1904. 



Madagascar. 

India 

Syria 

China 



Total. 



2555 
211 

36 
60 



2S62 



**HICKSITE."2 

YEARLY MEETINGS. 



Philadelphia ^ 


1900 
1900 
1900 
1890 
1899 
1899 
1900 


1 1482 
2389 
2955 
1535 
1536 
1059 
400 


New York* 


Baltimore 


Genesee^ 


I ndiana 


Illinois 


Ohio (estimated) 




Total 




21356 







" WILBURITE " AND " PRIMITIVE." 

No Statistics appear to have been gathered since the United 
States Census of 1890. 

RECAPITULATION. 

Friends (Orthodox) America (1904) 92265 

"Hicksite" " (1900) 21356 

"Wilburite" " (1890) 4329 

" Primitive " " (1890) 232 



Great Britain, Ireland, etc. (1904) 21890 



118182 
21890 



140072 
Foreign Mission Fields under the care of 

American P'riends (1904) 2905 

Foreign Mission Fields under the care of 

London Yearly Meeting (1904) 2862 5767 



Total. 



M5839 



^ Estimated. 

2 Taken from Friends' Almanac, 1902, p. 91. 

2 Number in 1905, TI107 (" Friends' Intelligencer.") 

* Number in 1905, 2256 (" Friends* Intelligencer.") 

^ Including the few Friends in Canada. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

OF THE MORE IMPORTANT WORKS CONSULTED. 



I. Bibliographies, and Manuscript Collections 

DATING FROM THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. 

Smith, Joseph, Descriptive Catalogue of Friends' Books, 
Two vols. London, Joseph Smith, 1867 ; Supplement, 
London, Edward Hicks, Jr., 1893. 

Smith, Joseph, Bibliotheca Anti-Quakeriana : A Cata- 
logue of Books Adverse to the Society of Friends, 
London, Joseph Smith, 1873. 

Manuscript Collections : 

The London Yearly Meeting, in its Library, Devonshire 
House, 12 Bishopsgate Street Without, London, England, 
has an unrivaled collection of manuscripts illustrating the 
early history of the Society. The Swarthmoor papers are 
often indorsed in George Fox's handwriting. The official 
records are very complete, reaching from the seventeenth 
century to the present time. 

Records relating to New England are at Sandwich and 
New Bedford. Mass., and at The Moses Brown School, 
Providence, R. L The Records relating to New York 
are somewhat scattered, though many of great value are 
in the Meeting House on Twentieth Street, and in that on 
Rutherford Place, New York City. At Friends' Library, 
and at the Meeting House, Fourth and Arch streets, 
Philadelphia, there are many records relating to Penn- 
sylvania and New Jersey. The Records of Baltimore 
Yearly Meeting previous to 1828 are at the Meeting House 
(" Hicksite "), Baltimore, Md., w^here they, like those at 
Philadelphia, are admirably cared for ; and Records of the 
Orthodox Body, and the Records of Virginia Yearly Meet- 

229 



230 The Friends. 

ing are in the possession of the Orthodox Friends of 
Baltimore, Md. The Records of North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting are at Guilford College, North Carolina. 

Manuscript Records : 

Records of Sandwich, Mass., Monthly and Quarterly 

Meetings beginning 1672. 
Records of Virginia Yearly Meeting beginning 1673. 
_^ Records of Burlington, N. J., Monthly Meeting begin- 
\ ning 1678. 
Records of Perquimans, N. C, Quarterly Meeting be- 
ginning 1679. 

II. Printed Collections, Etc. 

Connecticut, Records of, 1636-63, Edited by J. H. 
Trumbull. Hartford, Brown & Parsons, 1850. 

'^^ Mary land. Archives of. Edited by Wm. Hand Browne. 
— Proceedings of the Council 1636-67, 1687 l8-i6g^; 
Proceedings of the Assembly 1666-76, Baltimore, 
1884-90. 

^Massachusetts Bay, Records of Edited by N. B. Shurt- 
leff, vols, iii.-v. Boston, 1854. 

*A^ew Jersey, State of, Documents of the Colonial His- 
tory of Vol. i., edited by William A. Whitehead. 
Newark, N. J., 1880. 

'f'New York, Documeiits relative to the Colonial History 
of. Thirteen vols. Edited by E. B. O'Callaghan. 
Albany, 1856-61. 

'^Pennsylvania, Colonial Records, Sixteen vols. Har- 
risburg, 1851-53. — Archives, Six vols. Philadel- 
phia, 1852-53.— ^r^/^/z/^j. 2d Series, 12 vols. Har- 
risburg, 1874-80. 

III. Printed Sources and Books Written from the 
the Sources. 

Adams, Brooks, The Emancipation of Massachusetts, 
Boston and New York, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1887. 

Adams, Charles Francis, Massachusetts, its Historians 
and its History. Boston and New York, Houghton, 
Mifflin & Co., 1893. 

* These are State publications. 



Bibliography. 231 

Bancroft, George, History of the United States of Amer- 
ica. Six vols. Author's last Revision. New York, 
D. Appleton & Co., 1886. 

Barclay, A. R. (Editor), Letters, etc., of Early Friefids. 
London, Harvey & Darton, 1841. 

Barclay, Robert (1833-1876), The Inner Life of the Reli- 
gious Societies of the Co7nmo?i7uealth Considered 
Principally with reference to the Infliiefice of Church 
Organization on the Spread of Christianity. Lon- 
don, Hodder & Stoughton, 1876; 2d ed., 1877; 3d 
ed., 1879. (The second and third editions are exact 
reprints of the first with the exception of the correc- 
tion of one slight error.) 

Baylie, Robert, A Dissuasive fro?n the Errours of the 
times. London, printed for Samuel Gellibrand, 1645. 

Beck, William, The Friends. London, Edward Hicks, 
Jr., 1893. 

Beck, William, and T. Frederick Ball, The London 
Friejtds' Meetings, London, F. Bowyer Kitto, 1869. 

Besse, Joseph, Sufferi^tgs of the Quakers. Two vols. 
London, Luke Hinde, 1753. 

Bishope, George, New-Enghuid Judged, etc. London, 
1661 ; reprinted i7o|. (No publisher.) 

Bowden, James, The History of the Society of Friends in 
America. Two vols. London, Alfred W. Bennett, 
1850-54. 

Bownas, Samuel, An Account of the Life, Travels, etc., 
of. London, Luke Hinde, 1756 ; 2d ed., James Phil- 
lips, 2795. 

Braithwaite, Joseph Bevan, Memoirs of Joseph John 
Gurney, etc. Two vols, Philadelphia, Lippincoit, 
Grambo & Co., 1854. 
A Brief State7nent of the Rise a7id Progress of the 
Testimofiy of the Religious Society of Friends against 
Slavery and the Slave Trade. Philadelphia, 1843. 

Burnyeat, John, The Truth Exalted. London, printed 
for Thomas Northcott, 1691. 

Comly, John, Jouriial of the Life and Religious Labors 
of. Philadelphia, T. Ellwood Chapman, 1853. 

Croese, Gerard, General History of the Quakers. Lon- 
don, John Dunton, 1696 ; originally published in 
Latin, Amstelodami, Apud Henricum & Viduam 



232 The Friends. 

Theodori Boom, 1675. An abstract of the translation 
is in Crouch's " Posthuma Christiana." 

Crouch, William, Posthuma Christiana, or a Collection 
of Papers, bei7ig a brief Historical Account^ etc, 
with Re^narks o?t Sundry Memorable Transactions 
relating to the People called Quakers, London, 
Assigns of J. Sowle, 17 12. 

Dixon, William Hepworth, History of William Penn, 
Founder of Penftsylvania, London, Chapman & 
Hall, 1851 ; 3d ed., Hurst & Blackett, 1872. 

Edmundson, William, Journal of the Life, Travels, etc, 
of. Dublin, Samuel Fairbrother, 1715. 

Edwards, Thomas, The First and Second Part of Can- 
grcEua, London, 3d ed., printed for Ralph Smith, 
1646. 

Ellwood, Thomas, History of the Life of [an Auto- 
biography]. London, Assigns of J. Sowle, 17 14. 
[Boston, Jas. R. Osgood & Co., 1877, and numerous 
other editions. 

Evans, William and Thomas, The Friends* Library, 
comprising Journals, Doctrinal Treatises, and 
other Writings of Members of the Religious Society 
of Friends, Fourteen vols. Philadelphia, printed 
for the Editors by Joseph Rakestraw, 1837-50. 

Exiles in Virginia, with Observations on the Conduct of 
the Society of Friends duriftg the Revolutionary 
War, etc Philadelphia, published for the Sub- 
scribers, 1848. 

** The First Publishers of Truth'* Edited for the Friends* 
Historical Society, by Norman Penney, Parts i and 2, 
London, 1 904-1905. [Still in course of publication.] 

Fox, George, A Journal or Historical Account of the 
Life, Travels, Sufferings, Christian Experiences, 
and Labour of Love in the Work of the Ministry of 
that Ancient, Eminent, and Faithful Servant of 
Jesus Christ, George Fox, who departed this life 
in great peace with the Lord, the ijth day of the 
nth 7nonth, i6go. The first volume, etc., London, 
Thomas Northcott, 1694. (Folio, the ist ed., one of 
the earliest impressions.) 

Note. — This volume is called *' the first volume," 
the second being the one described in the next entry. 



Bibliography. 233 

Fox, George, A Collection of 7na7iy Select and Christian 
Epistles, Letters, and Testi7nonies, Written on 
stindry Occasions by that Ancient, Eminent, Faith- 
ful Friend and Minister of Christ Jesus, George 
Fox. The second volume, etc. London, J. Sowle, 
1698. (Folio, the ist ed.) 

Fox, George, Gospel Truth Deinonstrated in a Collection 
of Doctrinal Books, Given forth by that Faithful 
Minister of Jesus Christ, George Fox, Containing 
Principles Essential to Christia7iity and Salvation, 
held afnong the People called Quakers, etc, Lon- 
don, J. Sowle, 1706. (Folio, the ist ed.) (Called the 
third volume.) 

Fox, Margaret, " Brief Collection of Remarkable Pas- 
sages," etc.. Relating to Margaret Fell, but by her 
2nd Marriage, Margaret Fox. London, 1710. 

Friends* Miscellany, Edited by John and Isaac Comly, 
vols. 1-12, Philadelphia, 1835-1839, 

Gough, John, History of the People called Quakers, 
Four vols. Dublin, Robert Jackson, 1790. 

Hallowell, Richard P., The Pioneer Quakers, Boston and 
New York, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1887. 

Hallowell, Richard P., The Quaker Livasion of Mass- 
achusetts, Boston and New York, Houghton, Mifflin 
& Co. ; 1st ed., 1883 ; 4th ed., 1887. 

Harvey, T. Edmund, The Rise of the Quakers, London, 
Headley Brothers, 1905. 

Hicks, Elias, Journal of the Life and Religious Labors 
of, Philadelphia, 1828 ; 5th ed., New York, Isaac 
T. Hopper, 1832. 

Hicks, Elias, A series of Externporafieous Discourses 
delivered i7i Philadelphia, etc, Philadelphia, J. & E. 
Parker, 1825. [These are referred to as *' Philadel- 
phia Sermons.] 

Hicks, Elias and Edward, Ser77ions delivered by, in 
Frie7ids* Meeti7igs, New York, in ^th Month, 18 2 j, 
taken in shorthand by L, H, Clarke a7id T, C, Gould, 
stenographers. New York, sold by J. V. Shearman, 
1825. 

Hicks, Rachel, Life, Written by Herself, New York, G. 
P. Putnam's Sons, 1890. 

Hodgson, William, The Society of Friends in the Nine- 



234 The Priends. 

teenth Century : A Historical View of the Successive 
Convulsions and Schisms therein during the Period. 
Two vols. Philadelphia, for sale by Smith, English 
& Co., 1876. 

Howgil, Francis, Dawnings of the Gospel Day, etc. Lon- 
don (no publisher), 1672. 

Hutchinson, Mr. [Thomas], History of Massachusetts 
Bay, etc. Vols, i and 2. Boston, New England, 
1764-67 ; 2d ed., London, M. Richardson, 1765-68. 

Janney, Samuel M., History of the Religious Society of 
Friends, from the rise to the year 1828, Four vols. 
Philadelphia, T. Ellwood Zell, 1859-67 ; 2d ed., 1867. 

Janney, Samuel M., The Life of Willia7n Fe7in, with 
Selections from his Correspoiidence and Autobiogra- 
phy. Philadelphia, Lippincott, Grambo & Co., 1st 
ed., 1851 ; 2d ed., rev., 1852. 

yoh7i Hopkins University Studies in History and 
Political Science. Tenth Series " Church and State," 
Baltimore, 1892. 

Long lsla7id Historical Society, Memoirs of the. Vol. i., 
** Journal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-80." 
[Jasper Bankers and Peter Sluyter.] Brooklyn, 
published by the Society, 1867. 

Magill, Edward H., Education in the Religious Society 
of Frie7ids. Philadelphia, Friends* Book Associa- 
tion, 1893. 

Marsden, J. B., History of the Early Puritans [to 1642]. 
London, Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1850; 2d ed., 1853. 

Marsden, J. B., History of the Later Puritans [to 1662J. 
London, Hamilton, Adams &Co., 1852 ; 2ded., 1854. 

Marshall, Charles, Journal, Epistles, etc. London, 
Richard Barrett, 1844. 

Maule, Joshua, Transactions ajid Cha^iges in the Society 
of Frie7ids. Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott & Co., 
1886. 

Michener, Ezra A., Retrospect of Early Quakerism. 
Philadelphia, T. Ellwood Zell, i860. 

Mott, James and Lucretia, Life and Letters of. Edited 
by their grand-daughter, Anna Davis Hallowell, 
Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1884. 

Neal, Daniel, History of New England. 1l\^q vols. 
London, J. Clark, 1720. 



Bibliography. 235 

Neill, Edward D., The Ejtc^llsh Colonization of America 
during the Seventeenth Century, London, Strahan, 
1871. 

Neill, Edward D., The Founders of Maryland, Albany, 
Joel Munsell, 1876. 

Neill, Edward D., Virginia Carolorum, Albany, N. Y., 
Joel Munsell's Sons, 1886. 

OTallaghan, E. B., Documentary History of New York, 
Four vols. Albany, Weed, Parsons & Co., 1850. 

Penn, William, A Collection of the Works of. Two 
vols. London, Assigns of J. Sowle, 1726, 

Penn, William, Preface to George Fox's •* Journal,** 
afterward reprinted in many editions as Rise and 
Progress of the People called Quakers, See list of 
Doctrinal Works. 

Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 
Vols, i.-xvii. Philadelphia, Historical Society of 
Pennsylvania, 1877-94. 

Proud, Robert, History of Pennsylvania m North America 
from 1 68 1 till after the year 1^42, etc. Two vols. 
Philadelphia, Zachariah Poulson, 1797. 

Rowntree, John Stephenson, Quakerism Past a7id Present, 
London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1859. 

Rowntree, John Stephenson, The Society of Friends, its 
Faith and Practice, London, Headley Brothers, 
1901. 

Rutty, John, A Treatise Co7icerning Christian Dls- 
ciplme, etc, [Dublin ?], printed in the year 1752. 

Seebohm, Benjamin, Memoirs of William Forster, Two 
vols. London, Alfred W. Bennett, 1865. 

Seebohm, Benjamin, Memoirs of the Life and Gospel 
Labors of Stephen Grellet. Two vols. London, 
Alfred W. Bennett, i860; 3d ed., 1S62. [Philadel- 
phia, H. Longstreth, 1868.) 

Sewel, William, The History of the Rise, Increase, and 
Progress of the Christian People called Quakers, 
Intermixed with s,everal remarkable occurrences 
written originally in Low Dutch, and also translated 
into English [by the author]. The second edition 
corrected. London, Assigns of J. Sowle, 1725. (Re- 
printed in many editions.) 

Smith, Samuel, The History of the Colony of Nova Ccesa^ 



236 



The Friends. 



ria, or New Jersey, etc, Burlington, James Parker, 
1765. Reprinted (2d ed.), 1877. 

Some account of the Conduct of the Religious Society 
of Friends towards the Indian Tribes, etc, from 
the time of their first settlement in America to the 
year 184J, London, 1844. 

Speakman, Thomas, Divisions in the Society of Friends. 
Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1869; ^^ ^^'* 
enlarged, 1893. 

Story, Thomas, Journal of the Life of Newcastle-upon- 
Tyne, Isaac Thompson & Co., 1747. 

Taylor, John, Meinoir of, London, J. Sowle, 1710; re- 
printed, York, W. Alexander & Son, 1830. 

Thomas, Allen C, Attitude of the Society of Friends 
towards Slavery in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth 
Centuries, particularly in relation to its own mem- 
bers. Papers of the American Society of Church 
History, vol. viii.. New York, 1897. 

Turner, Frederick Storrs, The Quakers, London, Swan, 
Sonnenschein & Co., 1889. 

Webb, Maria, The Fells of Swarthmoor Hall, London, 
T. Bowyer Kitto, 1865 ; 2d ed., 1867. 

Webb, Maria, Penns and Peni7igtons of the Seventeenth 
Century. London, F, Bowyer Kitto, 1867. 

Westcott, Brooke Foss, Social Aspects of Christianity, 
London and Cambridge, Macmillan & Co., 1887. 

Whitehead, William A., East Jersey under the Proprie- 
tary Goveriiments, 1846 ; 2d ed , revised and en- 
larged, Newark, N. J., Martin R. Dennis, 1875. 

Whittier, John Greenleaf, The Journal of John Wool- 
man, with an Introduction. Boston, Jas. R. Osgood 
&Co., 1876. 

Wilbur, John, Journal of, etc. Providence, Geo. H. 
Whitney, 1859. 

Wilson, Thomas, Journal of the Life, Travels, etc, of, 
Dublin, Samuel Fuller, 1728. 

Winsor, Justin, Narrative aftd Critical History of Amer- 
ica, Eight vols. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 
1886-89. 

Woolman, John, Journal of Dublin, R.Jackson, 1776. 
(See also Whittier, John G.) 



Bibliography. 237 

IV. Doctrinal, Controversial, Etc. 

An Address from Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting of 
Friends to the members of that Religious Society 
within the limits of New England Yearly Meeting 
and elsewhere. New York, Percy & Reed, 1845. 
[" Wilburite.'*] 

An Appeal for the Ancient Doctrines of the Religious 
Society of Friends, Published by the direction of 
the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia, in the Fourth 
Month, 1847. Addressed to its members. Philadel- 
phia, printed by Joseph Kite & Co., 1847. 

An Appeal to the Society of Friends on the Primitive 
Simplicity of their Christian Principles, and Church 
DisciplinCy and on some recent Proceedings in the 
said Society, [In regard to Hannah Barnard.] Part 
I. and II., pp. 233. London, 1801. Also the Sequel, 

A Narrative of the Proceedings in America of the Society 
called Quakers in the case of Hannah Bar7iard, etc^ 
pp. 145. London, 1804. 

Barclay, Robert, An Apology for the Trtie Christian 
Divinity as the sa^ne is held forth and preached by 
the People called in Scorn Quakers^ etc. In Latin, 
Amsterdam, Jacob Claus, 1676 ; 1st ed. in English 
[no place], 1678. 

Bates, Elisha, The Doctrines of Friends^ etc. Mount 
Pleasant, Ohio, 1825. [Frequently republished.] 

Christian Discipline of the Society of Friends in Great 
Britain, etc, London, Samuel Harris & Co., 1883, 
14 Bishopsgate Street Without). 

A Confession of Faith in the most necessary things of 
Christian Doctrine, Faith, and Practice according 
to the Testimony of Holy Scriptures, Given forth 
from the Yearly Meeting at Burliyigton the yth of 
yth Moneth, i6g2, by the despised Christian People 
called Quakers, Printed and sold by William Brad- 
ford in Philadelphia, 1693. (2d ed.) [Issued by 
Keith's followers.] 

Crewdson, Isaac, A Beacon to the Society of Friends, 
London, Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1835, ^Iso New 
York, 1835. 

A Declaration of New England Yearly Meeting 



238 The Friends. 

Friends upon various Christian Doctrines ^ etc. 
Providence, Knowles & Vose, 1845. 

Declaration of the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in 
Philadelphia, respecting the proceedings of those who 
have lately separated from the Society ; and also, 
showing the Contrast between their doctrines and 
those held by Friends, Philadelphia. 1828. 

Epistles from the Yearly Meetifig of Friends held in 
London, to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings in 
Great Britain, Ireland, a7td elsewhere, from 1681 to 
j8^7 inclusive. With an Historical Introduction, 
and a chapter comprising some of the early Epistles 
and Records of the Yearly Meeting. In two volumes. 
London, Edward Marsh, 1858, 14 Bishopsgate Street 
Without). 

An Epistolary Declaration and Testimony of the Yearly 
Meeting of Friends for New England respecting the 
Proceedings of those who have effected a Separation 
therein, etc. Providence, B. A. Moore, 1845. 

Evans, Thomas, Exposition of the Faith of the Society 
of Friends, Philadelphia, Kimber & Sharpless, 1827. 
(Frequently reprinted, Friends' Book-store, Philadel- 
phia.) See also Friends' Library, Introduction, vol. i., 
p. i. and pp. 109-141. 

Gurney, Joseph Johxiy Observations ojt the Distinguishing 
Views a7td Practices of the Society of Friends, 
London, Gilpin, 1824; 7th ed., Darton & Harvey, 
1834, New York, various editions. 

[Keith, George,] Some Reasons and Causes of the Late 
Seperation That hath come to pass at Philadelphia 
betwix us, called by Some the Sep er ate Meetings 
And Others that 7neet apart from us. More partic- 
ularly ope7ied to Vindicate and clear us and our 
Testiinony in that respect, viz.. That the Seperation 
lyeth at their Door, and They {and, not We) are 
justly chargeable with it. With an Apology for the 
present Publication of these Thiftgs, Philadelphia, 
William Bradford, 1692, p. 36. 

Letters and Observations relating to the Controversy 
respecting the Doctrine of Eli as Hicks, Containing 
a review of his letter to Dr. N. Shoemaker. 3d edi- 
tion revised. Printed for the Reader, 1824. 



Bibliography. 239 

Narrative of Facts and Circujnstances that have tended 
to produce a Secession from the Society of Frie7ids 
in New England Yearly Meeting, Providence, 
Knovvles & Vose, 1845. Also Strictures on the 
above by the Meeting of Sufferings of New Englaud 
Yearly Meeting. ^^45- 

Penn, William, The Rise and Progress of the People 
called Quakers, in which their Fundamental Pri?i- 
ciples. Doctrines, Worship, Ministry, and Disci- 
pline are plainly stated, etc, 7th ed., London, 1769. 
(Originally published as the preface to George Fox's 
'* Journal." Many editions, e.g., Friends' Book-store, 
Philadelphia, 1865.) 

Proceedings, including Declaration of Christian Doc- 
trine, of the General Co7iference of Friends held ifi 
Richmo7td, Indiana, U. S. A,, 188 J, Published by 
direction of the Conference. Richmond, Ind., Nichol- 
son & Bro., 1887. 

Proceedings of a Conference of Friends of America held 
in Lidianapolis, Indiana, Published by direction of 
the Conference. Richmond, Ind., Nicholson & Bro., 
1892. 

Proceedi7igs of the Conference of Frie^ids of America, 
held in Indianapolis, Ind., 1897. Published by direc- 
tion of the Conference, Philadelphia. The American 
Friend, 1898. 

Minutes and Proceedings of the Five- Years Meeting of 
the American Yearly Meetings held in Indianapolis, 
Ind., igo2. Also Minutes of the Quinque7utial Co7i- 
ference. Fi7ial sessio7i. Published by direction of 
the Five-Years Meeting, Philadelphia. The John C. 
Winston Co., 1903. 

Proceedi7igs of the Swarth7tiore Co7iferences ; First-day 
School Ge7ieral Co7ifere7icej Friends' U7iion for 
Phila7itJiropic Labor ; Friends* Religious Co7ifer- 
e7ice J Frie7ids' Educatio7ial Co7ifere7ice, held 071 the 
grou7ids of Swart h77iore College, Swarthmore, Pa., 
fro77i Fourth-day Eighth Mo7ith igth to Fourth-day 
Eighth Month 26th, inclusive, i8g6. Philadelphia, 
1896. Printed for the Conference. 

Proceedings of the Frie7ids' Ge7ieral Co7ifere7ice; First- 
day School, Philanthropic, Educational, Religious ; 



240 The Friends. 

held at Richmond, Indiana, i8g8, Philadelphia, 
Printed for the Conference, 1898. 

Proceedings of the Friends' General Conference, Firsts 
day School, Philanthropic^ Educational, Religious, 
held at Chautauqua, New York, igoo, Philadel- 
phia. Printed for the Conference, 1900. 

Proceedings of the Friends' General Conference, First- 
day School, PhilaJithropic, Educational, Religious^ 
Young Friends' Associations, held at Asbury Park, 
New Jersey, igo2. Philadelphia. Printed for the 
Conference, 1902. 

Proceedings of the Friends' General Conference, First- 
day School, Philanthropic^ Educational, Religious, 
Young Friends' Associations, held at Toronto, 
Canada, igo4, Philadelphia, Printed for the Con- 
ference, 1904. 

Rules of the Discipline of the Yearly Meeting of Men 
and Women Friends, held in Philadelphia, Stereo- 
typed for the Yearly Meeting. Philadelphia, 1883. 
[*'Hicksite."] 

A Summary of Some of the Doctrines and Testimonies of 
the People of God or Friends (called Quakers), 
Prepared and published by Abraham Lawton, Joseph 
Bancroft, and Evan T. Flinn. Thos. W. Stuckey, 
printer [1869]. 

The Testimony of the Society of Friends on the Continent 
of Afnerica, New York, Printed by R. & G. S. 
Wood, 1830. 

A Vindication of the Disciplinary Proceedings of New 
England Yearly Meeting of Friends by the Meeting 
for Sufferings, Boston, 1852. 

V. Legal Trials and Decisions. 

Bancroft, Sidney C, Report of some of the Proceedings 
in the case of Oliver Earle and others, in Equity 
against William Wood and others in the Supreme 
Court of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, including 
the opinion of the Court as pronouficed, Lemuel 
Shaw, C, y., etc, Boston, Little, Brown & Co., 1855. 

Foster, Jeremiah J., An Authentic Report of the Tes- 
tijnony in a cause at issue i7t the Court of Chancery 
of the State of New Jersey, between Thomas L, 



Bibliography, 241 

Shotwell, Complainant, and Joseph He7idrickson 
and Stacy Decow, Defendants, Two vols. Phila- 
delphia, J. Harding, 1831. 

A i^ull Report of the Case of Stacy Decow and Joseph 
Hendrickson vs. Thofnas L. Shotwell, decided at a 
Special Ter^n of the New Jersey Court of Appeals^ 
held at Trento7i in July and August, 1833, em- 
bracing the decisio7t of the Court of Chancery from 
which the Appeal was 7nade, the arguments of the 
Counsel on each side, and the Final Decisio7i of the 
Court of Appeals. Take7i down i7i shortha7id by 
C07npete7it reporters, and revised by the respective 
counsel. Philadelphia, P. J. Gray, 1834. 

Report of the Trial of Frie7tds, Stetibenville, Ohio, 7J- 
26 October, 1828. Philadelphia, 1829. 

VI. Periodicals. 

The A7nerican Friend, vols, 1-12, Philadelphia, 1894- 
1905. [This paper is a continuation of the Friends* 
Reviev^, and Christian Worker.] 

The British Friend, First Series, vols. 1-49, Glasgow, 
1843-1891 ; New Series, vols. 1-14, Glasgow, and 
London, 1892-1905. 

The Christian Worker, vols. 1-24, New Vienna, Ohio, 
and Chicago, 1871-1894. 

The Friend, (Philadelphia), vols. 1-78, Philadelphia, 1827- 
1905. 

The Friend, (London), First Series, vols. 1-18, 1843- 
1860 ; New Series, vols. 1-45, London, 1861-1905. 

Friends' Litelligencer and Journal, vols. 1-62, Philadel- 
phia, 1 847-1905. 

Frie7ids' Quarterly Examiner, vols. 1-39, London, 
1867-1905. 

Frie7ids' Review, vols. 1-48, Philadelphia, 1 847-1 894. 

The Jour7ial of the Friends' Historical Society, vols. 1-2, 
London, 1903-1905, 

Miscella7ieous Repository, edited by Elisha Bates, vols. 
1-4, Mount Pleasant, Ohio, 1827-1831. [A fifth 
volume was published, partly in Ohio, and partly in 
England, the numbers appearing at irregular inter- 
vals.] 
16 



INDEX. 



American Revolution, Friends 

and the, 116-118. 
Anti-slavery Friends, (Indiana), 

174. 
Archdale, John, 88. 

B. 

Baltimore Yearly Meeting, 80, 
81. Separation in, 140 ; " Wil- 
burites " in, 152. 

Baptism, 56. 

Barclay, Robert, S6. 

Barclay, Robert (19th cent.), his 
" Inner Life," etc., 40, (note). 

Barclay's Apology, 55. 

Barnard, Hannah, 119-120. 

** Beaconites," 143. 

Bible, estimation of, 57, igno- 
rance of, 121, and (note). 

Bible Schools established, 170. 

Bible Society, 121 (note), 170. 

Bibliography, 229-241. 

"Binns Meeting" in Ohio, 152. 

Bryn Mawr College, 189. 

Buck Hill Falls Summer School, 

213- 
Burlington, N. J., 84. Yearly 

Meeting, 85. 
Bumyeat, John, 69, 74, 78, 80. 



Canada, Yearly Meeting, 195, 

" Canons and Institutions," 52, 
106. 

Carolinas, The, 86-88. 

Civil War, Friends and the, 
175-17S. 

Colleges and Schools, 164-166, 
186-190. 

Confederate Government and 
Friends, 177. 

Conferences (" Hicksite,") 211- 
214. 

Conferences (Orthodox)" 1829," 
169;" 1849," "1851," "1853," 
150-151 ; "1887," 198; " 1892," 
201 ; " 1897," 215 ; " 1902," 
216. 

Connecticut, Friends in, 71. 

" Constitution and Discipline," 
1900, 24-26, 216. 

Creeds, not used, 53. See Dec- 
larations of Faith. 

D. 

Declarations of Faith, 53-55 ; 

167; 198. 
Decline in members, Causes of, 

191-194. 
Discipline, 14; Rise of, 103-109; 



243 



244 



Index. 



" Uniform," 24-26, 216 ; see 
" Canons and Institutions," 
also Constitution and Disci- 
pline. 
Doctrines, distinguishing, 36-39; 

54. 
Dress, 44. 



Edmundson, William, 69, 75, 78, 

86. 
Education, 50, 186-190. 
Educational Conference, 1905, 

220; Conferences, 221. 
Elders, 18, 108 (note). 
Emigration to the West, 191- 

193- 
Fell, Margaret, afterward Mar- 
garet Fox, 39. 



Five- Years Meeting, 25, of 
" 1902," 217-220. 

Fox, George, sketch of, 28-30; 
his practice and teaching, 30- 
35; "illiteracy," 35 (note); 
and schools, 50; in New 
England, 69; in New York, 
74; Virginia, 78; Maryland, 
80, 81 ; Carolina, 86. 

"Free Quakers," 118. 

"Friend, The," 171. 

Friends, The, Rise of, 27 ff . ; 
growth, 35 ; early doctrines, 
36; missionary zeal, 36; early 
ministry in, 39; origin of 
name, 41, and 42 (note) ; num- 
ber 1700, 102 ; changes in, 195 
ffvf 200, 203. 

" Friends Library," 171. 



George School, 165, 

German Friends, 1688, protest 

against slavery, 113. 
Grant, President, his "Indian 

Policy," 179-181. 
Grellet, Stephen, 171, 123, 

(note). 
Gumey, Eliza P., and President 

Lincoln, 176. 
Gurney, Joseph John, 144-148. 

H. 

Haverford College, 188. 

Hicks, Elias, 123-127, 128, 130. 

" Hicksites," see " Separation, 
1828," 160-168; and London 
Yearly Meeting, 161 ; num- 
bers, 166, 214; also statistics, 
225, 227 ; Yearly Meetings, 12 
(note), 166; conferences, 167, 
211-214; doctrine, 167. 

" Hoyle Meeting " in Ohio, 152. 

I. 

Indiana Yearly Meeting, separa- 
tion, 140; anti-slavery separa- 
tion, 174. 

Indians, American, and Friends, 
110-112, 178-183. 

" Inner Light," 42. 



Janney, Samuel M., 164, 89 
(note). 

K. 

Keith, George, and his schism, 
96-98, and note, 96. 



Index. 



245 



" King's Missive," 64. 



Language " Plain," 43, 195. 

Lincoln, Abraham, 176. 

London Yearly Meeting, 51, 52 
(note) ; and " Hicksites," 161, 
214 (note) ; and " Wilburite 
Separation," 152 ; and "Con- 
ference, 1887," 198 ; statistics, 
226, 227. 

M. 

Marriage, 58. 

Maryland, Friends in, 79-82. 

Massachusetts, first Friends in, 
62 ; persecution in, 62 ff . 

Meetings, for Discipline, 49 ; 
Ministry and Oversight, 21 ; 
Monthly, 18, 47, 69; Per- 
manent Board, 17, 25; Pre- 
parative, 19, and note ; Quar- 
terly, 17, 48; Representative, 
17, and note ; Select, 22 ; Suf- 
erings, 17 (note), 102 ; Yearly 
Meetings, 12-17; names of 
Yearly Meetings, 12 (note) ; 
new Yearly Meetings, 194, 
195 ; Meetings for Worship, 
21, 23, 56. 

Membership, 15, 108-110, Asso- 
ciate, 25. " Birthright," 108 ff. 

" Middle Ages of Quakerism," 
107. 

Ministers, 20-21, 56; ministers 
traveling, 23. 

Missions, 35, 36, 204. 

Mott, Lucretia, 162, 163. 

Moses Brown School, 187. 



N. 

Negroes, and Friends, 11 2-1 15, 
172-175, 184; 211 (note); 218. 

New Jersey, Friends in, 83-86. 

"New Lights," 127. 

New York, P>iends in, 72-76. 

New York Yearly Meeting, 76 
and note ; separation in, 
139; " Wilburites," 150. 

New Garden School, 188. 

North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 
87 ; in civil war, 178; separa- 
tion, " Wilburite," 209. 

North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 
(" Wilburite,") 209. 

O. 

Oaths, 43. 

Ohio Yearly Meeting, " separa- 
tion, 1828," 140 ; " Wilburite," 
149, 152. 

Overseers, 19, 108 (note). 

Ordinances, 55, 56, 197. 

P. 

"Pastors" and the "Pastoral 

System," 25, 200, 202. 
Peace Conference, 1901, 207. 
Penn, William, and New Jersey, 

83 ; in Pennsylvania, 89-94 ; 

and the Indians, 92 ff. 
Pennsylvania, Friends in, 88-99, 

lOI. 

Permanent Board, 17, 25. 
Perrot, John, and his schism, 

48, 49 (note), 74, ySy 80. 
Philanthropy, 184, 211. 
Persecution, see Sufferings. 



246 



Index. 



Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, 
founded, 85, 95 ; separation 
in, 130-139; action in regard 
to " Wilburites," 154. 

"Primitive" Friends, 156, 208. 



Quaker, origin of name, 41 

(note). 
Queries, 19. 

R. 

Ranters, 75, and note. 

Rhode Island, Friends in, 67-71. 

S. 

Schools, 164-166; 186-190. 

Scriptures, see Bible. 

Separations, " 1828," 122-142 ; 
" Wilbur-Gurney," 143-152 ; 
"Anti-slavery," 174; " Wil- 
burite," 149, 155, 156, 209. 

Slavery, and Friends, 11 2-1 15, 
172-175. 

Statistics, 225-227. 

Steamboat Frank, 183. 

" Steeple-houses," 32. 

Story, John, 51 ; see Wilkinson. 

Sufferings, 59; in Massachu- 
setts, 61-67; Connecticut, 71 ; 
New York, 72 ff . ; Virginia, 
77 ; Maryland, 82 ; civil war, 
177, 178 ; Revolution, 117. 

Summer Schools (Orthodox), 



Haverford,222 ; (*' Hicksite"), 

213. 
Supper, the (Eucharist), 56. 
Swarthmore College, 166. 

T. 

Temperance, Cause of, 185,211, 

218, 222. 
" Thou and thee," 43. 

V. 

Virginia, Friends in, 76-79. 
Virginia Yearly Meeting, 79 and 
note, 192. 

W. 
War, 44, 57, 207. See " Suffer- 
ings." 
Westtown School, 186. 
Whittier, John G., 168 (note), 

175- 
Wilbur, John, 145-148. 
"Wilburites," 143-156, 209-211. 
Wilkinson and Story Schism, 50. 
Williams, Roger, 69. 
Woolman, John, 114, 116 (note). 
Woman, position among 

Friends, 16, 51. 
Women's Meetings begun, 51. 



Yearly Meetings set up, 194. 
" Young Friends' Associations," 
212,213. 



DEC 20 1905 



